The Vanishing Border Fence

Actually, my title is inaccurate - typically, something must exist before it can vanish.

As shocking as it may sound, Congress has, yet again, reneged on promised border enforcement steps. This time, it appears Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) have led the charge to essentially kill the fence promised in late 2006:

Congress is poised to give the President a $516 billion omnibus spending bill that would downgrade previous mandates for a double-layered border fence to be built along the southern border.

The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required “two layers of reinforced fencing” be constructed in five separate areas, but Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R.) slipped a provision into a fiscal year 2008 spending bill that weakens the law.

More details, including how much (little) fence has been built, are available at: Omnibus Busts Border Fence.

HotAir is reporting that Duncan Hunter (R-CA) slammed Congress for the gutting the fence (video available at link) and Malkin has also taken them to task:

GOP Majority Leader John Boehner tried to blame the House Democrat majority: “The fact that this was buried in a bloated, 3,500-page omnibus speaks volumes about the Democrats’ unserious approach on border security and illegal immigration,” he said. “Gutting the Secure Fence Act will make our borders less secure, but it’s consistent with the pattern of behavior we’ve seen all year from this majority.” But it’s border state Republicans who’ve been gunning to undermine the law while the ink was still fresh.

Seems like it is worthwhile contacting your Senators and Representative and politely, but firmly:
1. Ask if they support the Hutchinson/Cornyn fence provision in the “omnibus spending bill”.
2. Remind them to uphold their promises, especially on this issue.

For those in Utah:

Click here for Sen. Bennett and Hatch web contact form links and phone numbers.

Utah Representatives
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT 1st)
Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT 2nd)
Rep. Chris Cannon (R- UT 3rd)
*If you are unsure who your Representative is, use the form at the top left of the House site.

Finally, it would be wise to call House/Senate Republican leaders with the same message:
Senator Mitch McConnell (202) 224-2541
Representative John Boehner (202) 225-6205

Illegal Immigrant Document Fraud At Airport

Well not only do we have to contend with identity theft/fraud (or click here) by illegal immigrants, but we also have to contend with airport security badge misuse at one of our biggest airports (Chicago O’Hare).  I would expect that the DOJ will drop the hammer on the company (Ideal Staffing Solutions Inc.) for this breach of security in a very sensitive area but we’ll see.

The original story and links are available at Hot Air as well as information on illegal immigrant voting.

Immigration Agents Bribed By Islamic Extremeists

I found this off FreeRepublic.com.  This was published in the Washington Times yesterday and it is not good. U.S. agents accused of aiding Islamist scheme (excerpted):

A criminal investigations report says several U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services employees are accused of aiding Islamic extremists with identification fraud and of exploiting the visa system for personal gain.

According to the document, other potential security failures include reports that:

Employees are sharing detailed information on internal security measures with people outside the agency.

A Lebanese citizen bribed an immigration officer with airline tickets for visa benefits.

A USCIS officer in Harlington, Texas, sold immigration documents for $10,000 to as many as 20 people.

A USCIS employee, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal, said many of the complaints in the multipage document are as many as three years old.

“Terrorists need immigration documents to embed in our society and work here without raising alarm bells,” said the employee.

The article is relatively short but provides more details as well as some information about the DEA report on Islamic extremists linking with drug cartels and  posing as hispanics.   I will have to keep an eye out for follow up articles and would expect that this be thoroughly investigated as it would appear to border on treason.  Which begs the question, would this be treason?

Follow Ups - John Doe Win, Employer Verification, Surge

First, a big win. Democrats killed a provision that would have provided legal protection for those reporting potential terrorist activities (so, people won’t hesitate or second guess themselves with the worry of opening themselves up to lawsuits). However, the provision was reinserted into the legislation (click here for the FNC story) during the conference committee. Thanks should go to Rep. Peter King, Republicans, and Sen. Lieberman (comes through for us again!).

Next, I recently put up a post about an interim legislative hearing on employer verification as a means to interdict identity theft. I also included a set of “Key Links” at the bottom of the post. One link I should have included (sorry, just thought of this), is UCourts. UCourts has the (so far) cheapest way to check your and your children’s SSN records to make sure no one is using their number. Right now, that is pretty much the only way to fight SSN theft (for employment) as there is no employer verification requirement in Utah. Unfortunately, it will only allow you to catch the theft after it has occurred (rather than preventing it with employer verification) but you will be able to take action before things get worse. Click here for a post with more information on UCourts.

Finally, Yon is upbeat on the surge and John Burns of the NYT has also had some positive stories. Another one to check out is Micheal Totten. He’s a blogger embedded with the 82nd Airborne (”All American”). His latest post (dated July 24th) is up: In the Wake of the Surge.

The Aftermath of S 1639 (Amnesty)

The bill is dead. So what now?

FIRST - Gratitude is in order. It was important for us to call our Senators to stop the bill. It is now just as important to call/email those voting nay and say “thanks”. I suggest picking at least 5 (other than your own) from the nay votes. If you’re Senator voted for (yea) on cloture, do NOT forget it when election time (especially primaries) come up. For those of us in Utah, Hatch voted nay and Bennett voted yea (keep this in mind for 2010, if he runs again).

Identity theft is going to be on ongoing issue as it related to illegal immigrants stealing/guessing citizen’s (and children’s) social security numbers. At this time, it looks like the Senate will need some time to lick its wounds and employer verification legislation will be left to the states to enact. I believe Alabama and Georgia already have. Fortunately, the word also seems to be getting out about worker verification.

States will probably be left to take the lead in implementing various enforcement measures (again Georgia and Alabama are some examples, but I’m forgetting another state…Colorado?) in an attempt to begin to control the issues caused by illegal immigration (especially those of the criminal stripe).

This is, unfortunately, unlikely but it would be nice to see Congress start anew with regular hearings (no closed door deal garbage) on bills dealing with our immigration system.

First, they need to regain trust of American people. The trust was already lost due to the ‘86 amnesty along with others passed since and the recent legislative tactic (back room dealing, pushing it through as fast a possible) has only made everyone more suspicious.

They should enact new, and bolster, current enforcement and border security measures. Keeping the promise to build the fence, for one, will go a long way, however, that, in and of itself will not be sufficient - I and many others are leery of simply being patronized so that some sweeping amnesty can be pushed through with the fence left to rot. A good example of this was that $4.4 billion for the fence that was pledged in the recent amnesty bill - it turns out even that measure is purported to have a loophole in it to allow the money to be used to implement Z visa (amnesty) provisions. It also seems duplicitous that, all of a sudden, the fence promised last year was, somehow, contingent on the legislation being passed this year. Border security and enforcement would also assist us in turning off the magnet that allows for our ‘underground’ labor market (Chambers of Commerce may not be happy, though).

Second, I would love to see us improve our current immigration policies. Knowing people who have come here legally on various visas (as well as even going before a US Consul General on behalf of one), the process needs to be streamlined. This is especially true of countries considered to be our strong allies. Realistically, such policies would have involve some type of profiling to weed out would-be security threats and provide for greater scrutiny of those in groups statistically more likely to pose a threat. I think this is something that could be done right on the heals of enforcement/security measures as recent controversy was almost entirely focused on illegal immigration rather than legal immigration.

After legal immigrants are addressed, a guest worker program would be something to look into. However, I would not rush this as many of the initial kinks and bugs of the (above) streamlined immigration process coupled with its enhanced security measures would, likely, translate to guest worker visas. It would be wise to learn from the streamlined immigration process for a year or two prior to tackling a guest worker program. Plus, we essentially already have 12 to 20 million ‘guest workers’ present in our country at this time.

I would also let the guest worker program run for a few years prior to tackling the illegal immigrants residing here (and weeding out the criminals that remain after the application of the various enforcement and security measures). Again, the things we learned in the previous phases of the immigration issue would have applications to any type of amnesty visa provided to eligible recipients.

I would, additionally, hope that all these things would be addressed as separate legislation through the normal process. Ultimately, a clear, open public discourse focused on each category, would significantly increase public acceptance of reforms where confusing, bloated bills with extraordinary legislative maneuvers only result in the opposite.

One last thing that is also key (which I’ve, admittedly, failed to notice) relates to what the Mexican Ambassador recently stated. He noted that the proposed US reform won’t stop illegal immigration and he’s right (read the post and full article)! Reforms need to reach across the border too (including past Mexico). That certainly should not be just another hand out. Often those to more harm than good - donated clothing can wipe out cottage industries, only further harming local economies (I think it was the President of Mozambique or Zambia who pleaded with the US to stop sending certain types of aid, a few years ago). We need to stand up and, more aggressively, support real democratic and market opening/economic freedom reforms in those countries. They are responsible for their country, but we can help when it is accepted. Again, be sure to click HotAir’s link for the full CSM editorial and pay special attention to the closing paragraphs.

Like I said, the Senate is going to be very sheepish for a while on any immigration issue. I was going to say we can content ourselves beating back the “fairness [censorship] doctrine” but it looks like Representative Pence has already taken care of it. That’s ok. Rep. Pelosi and Sen. Reid (don’t forget Murtha) are already plotting on Iraq for July.

Shotgun Blast - 3 topic post

There are a bunch of issues I’ve wanted to talk about recently but have been tied up trying to track the illegal immigration fiasco in the Senate. I will continue to do so and we’ll start with that subject:

Immigration

The Politico notes (Immigration bill in four easy pieces) that there is a gathering push to break up the immigration bill:

Over the past two weeks, a handful of senators and representatives have argued that the complex Senate bill, teetering on a political and legislative seesaw, should be torn apart to deal with each component separately.

Additionally, the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest federation of unions, on Wednesday announced its opposition to the bill and suggested a less comprehensive approach might help coax its support.

But even backers have chafed at the broad approach. Underscoring the tenuous nature of the bill’s support, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who has backed the measure, immediately raised the question after it stalled June 7: “Is comprehensive too much?”

Politico goes on to talk about polling showing opposition but fail to cite the polls/pollsters (not real helpful). The second comment to the post is interesting as well - it is from someone who was affected by identity theft (assuming they’re being truthful) and their reaction to the amnesty.

Military

If you are unaware, Operation Arrowhead Ripper was launched. Now would be a good time to keep tabs on the milblogs to get some raw action reports. The good news is, it appears Iraqis are cooperating.

Michael Yon-
Operation Arrowhead Ripper: Day One
Be Not Afraid:

Be Not Afraid

You shall cross the barren desert, but you shall not die of thirst. You shall wander far in safety though you do not know the way. You shall speak your words in foreign lands and all will understand. You shall see the face of God and live.

Be not afraid.
I go before you always;
Come follow me, and I will give you rest.

Bill Roggio is also on it:
The Battle of Iraq – 2007
The Battle of Baqubah II

MNF-Iraq also has a release out: Task Force Lightning continues Arrowhead Ripper in Baqouba

Continue to pray for our military and the Iraqis and their success. Don’t forget those in Afghanistan, either!

There is also some background as to why we lost Gen. Peter Pace. I wish Gen. Pace the best, he didn’t deserve this type of treatment. Thanks Gen. Pace. To learn more about the type of person and leader Pace is, take a look at his commencement address at the Citadel, it is inspiring. Unfortunately, this type of stuff isn’t going to be limited to Gen. Pace:

Military Officers Now Targets on Hill

Freedoms

“Progressives” continue their march to shut down things they don’t like, namely talk radio (and other purportedly conservative broadcasts). This is cloaked under the guise of the “fariness doctorine” which is essentially code for government bureaucrats deciding what you should be allowed to listen to and how much. Basically, they don’t want you, the market, to make the decision. Of course, the same folks that bring you this sham are those who’s top priority is protecting the 1st Amendment. Maybe they should mention the caveat: “…as long as we agree with the speech”. They seem to forget that the 1st Amendment also includes people’s right to choose what speech to listen to (or not) - just because you have freedom of speech doesn’t mean people should be forced to listen to you.

In local news, Davis County enacts smoking ban. I don’t smoke and, while I was exposed to plenty of second hand smoke in my youth, still don’t like it (I do like the smell of pipe smoke, however). The County made smoking class B misdemeanor in outdoor public places (parks, golf courses etc). I’m so tired of these government nannies. If smoking is such a big bad thing, then just completely outlaw it (prohibition part deux?). Ultimately, people have the right to smoke, so let them do so outside, at least (government is even banning smoking in private clubs, but that’s another rant).

Finally, PBS still doesn’t want anyone to see the film about moderate Muslims and is using disengenuous tactics to bury the film. More information at FreeTheFilm.net.

Amnesty Bill 2 (S 1639) and Comments

The Senate came out with a ‘new’ bill (including new number - S1639) to include a few changes. The Heritage Foundation has a copy of the bill available at their site.

As I understand it there isn’t anything too new in the bill. They threw borrowed money ($4.4 billion) in for border security and may extend the background check period to 30 days (I’m not sure about this). It seems that proponents think throwing money at the problem (rather than substantive changes) and shutting down Senate critics will somehow magically solve the major issues the bill continues to have. Ultimately, serious gaps will remain and, unfortunately, more problems continue to be found:

The Senate Immigration Bill: A National Security Nightmare (Giving Terrorists Options) A short MUST READ

Loophole in Senate Immigration Bill to Pay $966 Billion in Social Security to Two Million Illegal Workers (TREA)
Can’t forget the Congressional Budgeting Office’s report: Bill will cut immigration by only 25%, claims CBO

The Senate shouldn’t be ramming through such a massive bill with far reaching effects in such a short amount of time. Each reform category (enforcement, traditional immigration, guest workers, illegals) should be given due time for open consideration (instead of this ridiculous closed door stuff) so that various organizations etc have time to find loopholes and allow lawmakers to fix them as much as possible. Enforcement could be rapidly passed and implementation begun. While that progresses, “traditional immigration” reforms (the guest worker program shortly thereafter) could be addressed. Ultimately the process would take a few years rather than a few weeks. Instead, they seem intent on pushing this through for the sake of saying they did something.

In terms of the drafts I put up:

I don’t think they would address the above issues. In the end, this only provides more reasons as to why we need to split the bill up and start with the enforcement stuff.

I also keep reading and hearing better ideas than mine (such as placing a portion of guest worker pay in an escrow service collectible at the border). The SSA should also be henceforth required to inform law enforcement and victims if their identity is breached (currently, there is some sort of legal barrier to doing so). We should also ban the use of the “matricula consular” as a form of valid identity for financial institutions, among other security concerns, given the cards lack of required security measures and identity verification prior to issuance.

A note on part IV: I never really gave the thing a good review but I don’t feel I have the time to comb back through it (so I posted it as I had promised). That should be fairly obvious as I didn’t get a chance to develop a list of difficult to forge documentation required to prove your pre 2006 residency/work and your identity (which would start to address the “National Security Nightmare”). I also don’t like giving the ID thieves a break but that’s all I could come up with (at the moment) as an effective means to find which numbers were compromised and inform victims.

If none of this lights your fire, just look to the border: Illegals light border fires to sidetrack U.S. agents

Immigration Reform - Pending Legal Immigrants (Part III)(clarification)

***Clarification: These are my proposals! Many of these things are NOT part of the current bill! This also applies to Parts I and II***

Pending Legal Immigrants (Part III)

This is designed for those already standing in the immigration lines now and in the future. These applicants will not qualify for the X visa (Part II). These provisions may be immediately implemented regardless of the progress of enforcement actions (Part I).

Streamline the process – we need to make legal entry (work visas, student visas, etc) much easier, especially when it comes to countries that don’t pose a threat or have populations which may pose a threat to the nation. This is a broad statement and will take someone more knowledgeable about the intricacies of the system to provide details on how to do this. I’ve had friends and family enter legally but I simply don’t have a sufficient knowledge of the system to make specific suggestions – I just know it is a long, difficult, tedious process. Likely, more consular officers will need to be hired.

Numbers – Again, this will be very tough to designate (need someone more knowledgeable than I). Preferably, the number would be fluid and self-regulating (indexed to economic demand, other factors, including how rapidly they are assimilated in the country). The Secretary of DHS would be given authority to reduce or cease issuance of ‘traditional visas’ (ie not the new X, Y etc visas). Congress would have to approve increases in visa numbers or alter indexing methodology and would retain the authority to over-rule the Secretary of DHS.

Work visas – employers must request these (I believe that is the current system) and provide health insurance (or a health bond) for the immigrant. Again, streamline this system (see “Staffing Services”)

Y visas – the guest worker system. Employers would have to request such visas and provide insurance or a health care bond for their worker. Additionally, these employers must post an immigration bond for each Y visa recipient they employ (cover enforcement costs, should the recipient overstay the visa etc).

These visas would be limited to non-technical and non-professional agricultural, industrial, landscaping, and construction etc fields.

These visas will not have a path to citizenship, but may be taken into account should a traditional work/other visa (with a path to citizenship) be applied for.

The ‘sticky wicket’ here is to find a way to balance employer demands with labor availability in the US (ie the employer isn’t requesting Y visas, left and right to artificially drop labor costs and engage in an unfair business practice). An index for the minimum Y visa labor wage for each Y visa labor/industry category may fit the bill here (employers would have to match the min wage).

Application violations (eg declare a general ag category for the lower wage when the job is in a higher labor cost category) would also carry a substantial fine which would go to DHS and DOJ/FBI for security and enforcement programs.

Y visas shall be valid for no longer than 6 months with an extension for an additional 6 months, at the employer’s discretion. Extensions are limited to a single extension, thereafter, the immigrant must return to their country of origin. Once employment with a single employer ends the employer must inform DHS or the issuing Staffing Service, the Y visa recipient must return to their home country or, if time remains on the visa, have it transferred to another employer (who must also post/transfer the bond).

Y visas will not be available in countries with Jihadi networks or countries with regimes of concern as designated by the US Department of State.

Current illegal immigrants shall not qualify for a Y visa without first obtaining a Z visa. If found to have been here illegally and obtaining a Y visa, the Y visa shall be revoked and the immigrant deported.

Finally, no company shall be established who’s sole purpose is to request Y visas (ie they don’t actually hire anyone, they’re just trying to filter people into the country with no real job). Engaging in this practice will also result in a substantial fine and possible prison time under human smuggling statutes.
(Note: I am not requiring employers to, first, look for a US worker – they need to hire those best for the job and shouldn’t be the government’s defacto welfare agency).

Overstay threshold – if Y visa holders overstay the visa timeframe (ie become illegal immigrants), they will be disqualified from Y visa issuance in the future. In addition, if Y visa overstays exceeds 10,000, Y visa issuance shall cease until such time as the number of overstays is cut in half.

Health care coverage – violation would result in a fine of $10,000 per uninsured employee. Typical coverage would have to consist of a catastrophic insurance policy (as used with Health Savings Accounts). The health bond would be a yearly calculation of the average health care cost for the average legal US worker (out-of-pocket, without insurance, and paying for the full cost of care). Non-essential emergency services and doctor visits would draw from this bond. Funds gained from violations would be split between DHS enforcement and a fund to reimburse hospitals and health care providers for uninsured patients (the latter may not be feasible based on administrative costs etc).

Staffing Services – Private companies may be licensed and audited by the US government to process Y visa applications (essentially, a middleman function speeding the process) and extensions. Such companies may take requests from US companies and match up applicants. They would also be responsible to run background checks etc and may charge their own fees in addition to established Y visa processing fees the US government may require of them. The US government will retain the right to revoke licenses from such businesses and pursue fines/criminal prosecution as well as conduct unannounced record etc audits. The US will also retain the issuance of tamper resistant IDs. Further, such businesses will be given a 10% share of the fine if they alert the US government to employer violations (I think this is legal…).

Bond companies – these too, may be established to handle health care and immigration bonds. They would also be given a 10% share of fines for reporting employer violations (I think this is legal…). The US would also retain the right for unannounced record audits etc.

Student visas – no changes other than the streamlined process

Chain immigration – I think the current reform bill addressed this well (I hope my memory is correct). If not, a point system should be established to determine the likelihood of a family member being a burden to the US and preference given to those who will contribute. Points should also be given based on how closely the petitioner is related to the prospective immigrant.

Asylum – give authority to Congress and the Secretary of DHS to grant asylum visas to certain countries (I think this is the current system).

Social services – legal immigrants would have no rights to government social services (current law, I believe).

ID – provide a tamper resistant ID for all visa types

Background checks – would be required prior to visa issuance. Cooperative agreements would have to be established with the countries the immigrants originate from (this may already be the case). In addition, those with visas would have an additional background check if they apply to extend their visa and/or apply for a new visa. Failing a background check (felonies and egregious misdemeanors including drunk driving etc) would terminate the visa and result in deportation or rejection of the application. Countries with Jihadi networks or other organizations or regimes of concern will require a more in depth background check.

An aside: I would very much like us to, finally, address ‘anchor babies’. I would love an amendment that would allow us to only designate a child as a citizen if they are born here to a current citizen (mother or father), legal permanent resident, or legal immigrant on a visa other than a temporary guest worker visa or tourist visas etc. This would have to be a Constitutional Amendment, however.

Immigration Reform Enforcement and Security (Part I)
Immigration Reform – Legal Immigrants (Part II)

UPDATE: Lowered Overstay threshold to a more manageable level for enforcement.

Immigration Reform – Legal Immigrants (Part II)

***Clarification: These are my proposals!  Many of these things are NOT part of the current bill!***

Legal Immigrants (Part II)

These provisions may be immediately implemented regardless of the progress of enforcement actions (Part I).

X visa - offer those currently here on legal visas (including student visas) a new visa (X visa?) which gives them an expedited (much faster than the illegal immigrants) path to citizenship. The X visa shall include a tamper resistant ID.

Background checks – applicants must pass a background check and maintain a clean record prior to receiving citizenship (ie while they hold the X visa). Countries with Jihadi networks or other organizations or regimes of concern (as designated by the US Department of State) will require a more in depth background check. Another background check shall be conducted prior to granting citizenship.*

Citizenship test – applicants for citizenship shall be required to pass an English proficiency test and demonstrate US historical/cultural etc understanding. Test criteria are to be established by the Secretary of DHS.

Forfeiture – X visas will be forfeited and original visa expiration dates apply if they fail a background check and the offense is not a deportable offense by current immigration law. Failure includes felonies and multiple misdemeanors (3) or a single misdemeanor if it involves drunk driving (there are, probably, other egregious misdemeanors I’m missing here). Forfeiture of an X visa does not prohibit application for a new visa if the offense does not preclude future visa qualification under established immigration law.

Armed Services – those currently in the armed services or who have served in the armed forces shall be offered immediate citizenship, if they have clean service records and maintained clean records post military service (for those no longer in the military).

Social services – No further access to US social or health care services will be granted by an X visa. These access rights are limited to current law.

DREAM act – If Congress is intent on this, the same benefits must be offered to those with current student visas and all US citizens.

Eligibility – This is a one time program limited to legal immigrants (in no way shall illegal immigrants qualify for this program). The X visa provision shall no longer be offered to those issued a visa after the date of program passage (ie your visa needs to be issued on or before the date this passes Congress). In addition, the X visa shall not be offered to legal immigrants who no longer hold a visa on the date this provision passes.

Sunset – The X visa shall be available to eligible applicants 10 years after the date of passage. Applications must be submitted (or post marked on or prior to the 10th year after passage). After that time, the X visa program will automatically terminate.

*I’ve heard background checks are much faster to conduct than in the past. I hope that is the case as background checks could be tough to do in a timely manner, but I don’t see a way around them (maybe someone has a better method) – we need to know who we are giving these benefits to.

Immigration Reform Enforcement and Security (Part I)

Immigration Reform Enforcement and Security (Part I)

I’ve come up with a series of four reform proposals that are ‘acceptable’ and, I believe, should be included in reforms. Don’t misunderstand, these represent some serious compromises on my part – there are several things I dislike but can stomach (barely).

Also note that these are essentially in draft form (I wrote all this up in about two hours, if that) and likely still have some gaps that need to be found/plugged and things that need to be clarified and elaborated on. Some things are redundancies for issues already included in the original amnesty bill.

Rather than delay these any further, however, I’ve decided to put them out (about one per day) now since the pro-amnesty folks in Congress are certainly not going to stop the back room dealing and their efforts to ram this through.

Here goes:

 ***Clarification: These are my proposals!  Many of these things are NOT part of the current bill!***

Enforcement and Security

Employer verification and reporting – require SSN and immigration status verification of all new hires (that includes citizens). Further, require employers to immediately (1 business day) report failed verifications to ICE and the FBI. This will help interdict identity theft and prevent hiring illegal immigrants, and stop fugitives from gaining employment (see here and here as well)

Notify victims – require DHS/ICE and/or the FBI to inform victims of identity theft as divulged by employer verification requirements and/or applications for legal status (part 4).

Employer sanctions – employers found in violation of verification requirements should face stiff fines. I was thinking along the lines of up to $10,000/violation/day of employment for initial offences and negligence (this could be tiered, based on circumstances – such as a simple warning for a first time clerical error etc) and up to $25,000/violation/day of employment for willful violations. Funds would go into DHS and DOJ (ICE/FBI) for enforcement and security operations and a percentage of the funds would also go into an “identity theft restitution fund” so victims of ID theft can be reimbursed for their expenses. In addition to fines, companies could face loss of any federal funds they receive and prison time (felony) for responsible parties (willful violations).

No amnesty for employers - employers should be held accountable for knowingly accepting false identities and forged documents, however, strong proof of willfully and knowingly doing so will be required. Essentially the burden of proof should be “beyond a reasonable doubt” rather than “preponderance of evidence” in a civil suit (we’re not out to make trial lawyers rich nor should we remove victims’ rights of redress). The current bill gives employers full amnesty, taking away victims’ rights to hold the business accountable for its willful actions.

The Fence – mandate and appropriate funding (in the House) for the border fence as established in the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

Other security - Establish directives and funding for additional border security measures (the ‘virtual fence’) including a significant increase of immigration enforcement agents. These measures should not be limited to the southern border, but also include the Canadian border as well as other ports of entry. Best security measures to be used should be left to the Secretary of DHS’s discretion with bi-annual progress reports, initially, required tapering off to annual reports as measures are implemented.

Mandate identity cards for immigrants – the card should be tamper resistant (let’s face it, nothing is really tamper proof).

Tax remittances – the US economy loses billions in these transfers. The tax should be low (around 1%) so as not to overburden those employing such transfers and be limited to personal transfers. Companies shall not be established as an umbrella group to cloak such transfers as institutional transfers rather than personal transfers (circumvent the tax). Monies received through this program should be retained by DHS and DOJ for security and enforcement programs.

Deportations – the Secretary of DHS shall deport illegal immigrants in a timely manner. No more catch and release. Period.

English – designate English as the official language of the United States but include an exception for law enforcement and emergency services where human health is concerned. A further exception may be made for immigration forms used in the country of origin (not the US), however, permanent residence and citizenship application forms must be only provided in English (consider it part of the proficiency test). I lived in several countries – they didn’t have forms printed in my language. I adapted, I either learned the language or brought someone along with me who did. When visiting other countries I also attempted to learn some of the language to at least say ‘hi’ and ‘thank you’ etc. The same courtesy should be expected here.

Sanctuary cities – cities opting to break or obstruct immigration law enforcement shall forfeit all federal funding with the exception of emergency response services in the event of a catastrophe or natural disaster etc. If I choose to obstruct an officer or aid and abet, I expect to be punished. Bureaucrats are not above the law and should face consequences when the rest of the ‘little people’ must.

As an aside, this does relate to illegal immigration, but is more focused on ID theft, in general:
Credit bureaus should be prohibited from creating sub-files on an individual’s credit (done so when name and SSN don’t match) OR required to disclose the sub files on free credit reports etc (currently limited to reports requested by financial institutions etc).

Mandate the above measures achieve significant progress (50% complete) and fully funded prior to amnesty dealing with illegal immigrants (part 4) being implemented. Should progress goals on the above measures be disrupted after illegal immigration amnesty measures are implemented, such programs shall be suspended until such time as progress and/or funding are re-established.
Yes, that means that the status quo remains in the meantime – no instant legal status to those here illegally. This should also help motivate the government (and all of us) to get these measures completed in a timely manner rather than delaying them, playing with their funding, or flat out not implementing them (ala 1986 amnesty etc).

Unfortunately, this stuff will cost us plenty of money. That’s what happens when you look the other way and let a problem grow to near unmanageable levels.