A Congressional Budget Office report: The Senate Amnesty Bill Would Only Reduce Illegal Immigration By 25%

The Washington Times has put out a truly amazing story that would kill the amnesty bill in the Senate as dead as a doorknob if the politicians from either party in the Senate were truly interested in securing the border and enforcing our laws.

“The Senate’s immigration bill will only reduce illegal immigration by about 25 percent a year, according to a new Congressional Budget Office report, Stephen Dinan will report Tuesday in The Washington Times.

The bill’s new guest-worker program could lead to at least 500,000 more illegal immigrants within a decade, said the report from the CBO, which said in its official cost estimate that it assumes some future temporary workers will overstay their time in the plan, adding up to a half-million by 2017 and 1 million by 2027.

“We anticipate that many of those would remain in the United States illegally after their visas expire,” CBO said of the guest-worker program, which would allow 200,000 new workers a year to rotate into the country.”

In other words, the federal government is estimating that if this bill is passed, 20 years from now we’ll have 9 to 15 million more illegals who will be wanting amnesty.

Worse yet, the guest worker program will turn into another easy means of access for illegals. They’ll come here, work as guest workers, and then when their time in the program is over they’ll just disappear.

That’s certainly possible because the work verification rules are written in a way that will allow illegal aliens to continue to get work for long stretches, even if they don’t have legitimate identification.

From The Corner, a response to a White House claim that the new bill will stop illegals from being hired by employers,

“4. WH – DHS records will unequivocally show that these individuals are not eligible to work.

Response:

If this is the case (that it is going to work so well), why not allow the employer to condition granting employment on confirmation? Page 98 of the bill, section 302(d)(5)(B)(i)(“An employer may not, however, make the starting date of an individual’s employment contingent on the receipt of a confirmation of the identity and employment eligibility.”) See also: “(F) Impermissible Use of the EEVS —

“(i) An employer may not use the EEVS to verify an individual prior to extending to the individual an offer of employment.

“(ii) An employer may not require an individual to verify the individual’s own employment eligibility through the EEVS as a condition of extending to that individual an offer of employment.

This in effect means that employers have to hire in the blind and then try to verify on the back end, including the litigation hassles they face if they decide they want to fire the alien or not. Even if the employer did not want to hassle with someone who was not clearly legal, the following section says he can do nothing about that (so much for DHS showing things promptly and unequivocally):

From Page 100: “In no case shall an employer terminate employment of an individual solely because of a failure of the individual to have identity and work eligibility confirmed under this section until a nonconfirmation becomes final and the period to timely file an administrative appeal has passed, and in the case where an administrative appeal has been denied, the period to timely file a petition for judicial review has passed. When final confirmation or nonconfirmation is provided, the confirmation system shall provide an appropriate code indicating such confirmation or nonconfirmation. An individual’s failure to contest a further action notice shall not be considered an admission of guilt with respect to any violation of this section or any provision of law.

And if they violate this they are fined 10,000 dollars for each violation (page 104).

Further, since you cannot condition employment on advanced verification, and the alien can appeal administratively and to the courts, he can drag it out, leave when a decision is near and do the same thing at another job. Gaming the system is not far fetched.

4. Finally, for now, they talk tough about the potential fines, but they include language on page 115 that allows the government to remit the fines if the Secretary finds mitigating circumstances justifying remission or mitigation of the fine. So, business as usual, the system is set up to allow litigation by the employer to reduce the fines back to simply a cost of doing business. (page 115).”

Shorter version: the system the government is putting in place won’t stop businesses from hiring illegals. What will happen is that the illegals will get hired, their info won’t check out, but they’ll still get to work for many months or even years while the bureaucracy and court system works through the backlog of millions of cases and finally determines that the illegal is not eligible. Then, the illegal will just slip back into the shadows, get another job, and the process will start all over again.

If you want to know why the American people oppose this bill 2 to 1 and only 35% of conservatives support Bush’s immigration policy (as opposed to 62% who support his policy in Iraq for example), it’s because this immigration bill doesn’t do the one thing that almost everybody says we need to do: secure the border and put an end to the flood of illegal aliens coming into the country.

An immigration bill that doesn’t fix our border security and immigration enforcement problem is like a boat that is riddled with holes. If the boat won’t float, what good is it? Similarly, if the immigration bill only reduces illegal immigration by 25%, what good is it?

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend