WHAT SHOULD I BE DOING INSTEAD OF THIS?
 
March 16th, 2012 By Kevin Osborne | News | Posted In: Immigration, Congress, Republicans, Protests, President Obama, 2012 Election

Anti-Immigration Group Targets Boehner

Numbers USA to air TV, radio ads here

boehnerJohn Boehner

A conservative organization that advocates for immigration reform will begin running TV and radio commercials in Southwest Ohio next week that attempt to pressure House Speaker John Boehner (R-West Chester) to allow a vote on the “E-Verify” bill.

The group, Numbers USA, said Boehner is letting the bill languish in the House Ways and Means Committee so Republicans don’t anger Latino voters in an election year. The House Judiciary Committee approved the bill last year.

The commercials include a 30-second TV ad and a one-minute radio ad.

Next to an image of Boehner, the TV spot states, “Meet House Republican Speaker John Boehner. He won’t let Congress vote on E-Verify. Thanks to Speaker Boehner, illegal aliens can keep American jobs. Now Americans, meet the telephone … tell him to bring E-Verify for a vote or he may not like your vote in November.”

Under the bill, the federal government’s voluntary E-Verify system that is used to check the immigration status of employees would become mandatory nationwide.

Currently seven states require E-Verify checks and 12 others require state agencies and contractors to use it. The federal government has operated its system for the past 15 years.

About 300,000 of the 2.2 million U.S. employers with five or more employees were enrolled in E-Verify as of autumn 2011, according to workforce.com.

The Internet-based system checks any employee’s personal information against the Social Security database and several Homeland Security databases.

If the employee is confirmed, that person is authorized to work.

If the person isn’t confirmed, he or she has eight working days to contest the finding with the Social Security Administration or the Department of Homeland Security.

“Speaker Boehner has supported legislation with E-Verify in the past, and the issue is currently working its way through the committee process,” Michael Steel, a Boehner spokesman, told The Washington Times earlier this month.

But Numbers USA isn’t convinced, and has launched the ad blitz in response.

Numbers USA said the bill would crack down on the hiring of undocumented immigrants and free up jobs that could be taken by unemployed U.S. citizens.

Critics, however, said the electronic monitoring system proposed by the E-Verify bill would be fraught with errors due to it reliance on incomplete or outdated databases. They cite the number of people who have mistakenly been placed on Homeland Security’s terrorist watch list as an example.

Further, opponents believe the bill would lead to more under-the-table hiring, while some Libertarians have worried that it’s a backdoor method for implementing a national I.D. card system.

The bill has caused some unlikely political alliances.

Supporters of the bill include President Barack Obama, GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Opponents include the American Civil Liberties Union and several labor unions.

Based in Virginia, Numbers USA was founded in 1997 by Roy Beck, an author and ex-journalist who worked for anti-immigration activist John Tanton. Tanton also helped form two other groups, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).

Numbers USA wants to reduce U.S. immigration levels to pre-1965 levels. The group’s website states, “The 1990s saw the biggest population boom in U.S. history … this population boom was almost entirely engineered by federal forced-growth policies that are still in place. The Census Bureau states that Americans will suffer this kind of rapid congestion every decade into the future unless Congress changes these policies.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization that monitors extremist groups, has said Numbers USA, FAIR and CIS have connections to white supremacist and neo-Nazi leaders.

A 2009 report by the center states, “FAIR, CIS and Numbers USA are all part of a network of restrictionist organizations conceived and created by John Tanton, the ‘puppeteer’ of the nativist movement and a man with deep racist roots.”

The report added, “As the first article in this report shows, Tanton has for decades been at the heart of the white nationalist scene. He has met with leading white supremacists, promoted anti-Semitic ideas, and associated closely with the leaders of a eugenicist foundation once described by a leading newspaper as a ‘neo-Nazi organization.’ He has made a series of racist statements about Latinos and worried that they were outbreeding whites.”

 
 
03.16.2012 at 08:03 Reply

Your article title misrepresents this issue and falsely labels NumbersUSA. This organization could be termed anti-illegal immigration and too high legal immigration with such high unemployment of our citizens.It's a shame the media can't stick to just the facts and truth anymore. The SPLC should be listed number one on their own list of restrictionist and racist. When facts and truth get in the way that's what many organizations stoop to.    

 

03.16.2012 at 11:34 Reply

Once we give our country away to foreigners it will be gone forever and that will be the end. Our kids and grandkids deserve to get the same great america that came down to us. We want them to be free and have a decent standard of living. That means we have to act NOW and stop the reelection of Obama!The Latino's are trying to get the two parties to start a bidding war to see who can pander more for their votes.. They want "comprehensive Immigration Reform" which is code for the dream act and Amnesty. Do not beleive that soft sounding phrase is not harmless! It is their code word for flooding the country with new immigrants so the labor market will have a massive oversupply. It will make it impossible for an american citizen to get a good job and the few jobs you can get will pay half as much as now. Obama and the democrats are willing to offer them everything in exchange for their votes. They are even willing to totally sell out the country! But the republicans have stood firm for working people and we have to make sure that they win. If Obama wins and the situation continues much longer and enough of these criminals start voting they will pass a dream act and they will flood the country and we will be a minority and it will be impossible to stop them next time. Therefore it has to be stopped now. The Latino's and the other immigrants are going to vote solid democrat so if we split our votes we are finished. Do not vote for Obama if you love america!

 

03.19.2012 at 10:16
Jac

For someone with such a passion for great America, it's odd that you're forgetting this country was founded and expanded by foreigners! Unless you're 100% Native American, your ancestors were foreigners. Our is a country built by immigrants, and that's something to be proud of!

 

03.19.2012 at 02:06

Jac, this country has had long periods (most recently from the mid 20's to the mid 60's, which coincidentally coincides with a period of growing wealth for working class Americans)where we largely cut off foreign immigration and attempt to assimilate the prior waves.  We had success with the 1890-1920 wave.  Hopefully, we can have success with this wave, but to naively believe that America is some magic land that can't help but be able to assimilate what has been mostly 3rd world immigrants into the educational/economic American mainstream is reckless and irresponsible.  Some early data suggests assimilation is not going that well and another American underclass is possibly being created with the usual tribalistic/insular views associated with modern day underclasses.  This cannot be good for the prospects of a future with a well-functioning democracy.  All we who are skeptical of the wisdom of continuing this mass 3rd world immigration are asking is that we have a debate on the real numbers and data about how this immigration is affecting real world America and not be mindlessly tsk-tsked away with near religious sentiments that America can somehow magically transform everyone in the world into prosperous democracy-loving patriots. 

 

03.19.2012 at 08:34

I'm fairly certain Jac doesn't think anything happens "magically," Trey. (Except magical things done by leprecauns and fairies, obvs.) I *think* what she means is that there must be a better way of handling immigration besides fences, walls and motes.  Like she said, we are a country nearly entirely built by immigrants and, for the most part, we've turned out okay.  The people who aren't assimilating properly are the ones that have come here illegally and then been forced to survive in an "underground/under the table" sort of situation.  By having such harsh terms, we're forcing that underclass.  If you want to avoid that, the answer isn't higher fences and deeper motes, nor is it stricter laws.  Instead of sending them away, we should be trying to help them survive.  And, right, hacimo, because immigrants only became a "problem" 3.5 years ago and once we have a different president they'll just disappear.

 

03.20.2012 at 07:18

Diedre, there has been some pretty extensive longitudinal studies of how well Hispanic immigrants from earlier periods have assimilated over multi-generations and if the recent mass waves from the past 30-40 years follow this trajectory over multi-generations, things definitely don't look very optimistic.  Jason Richwine does an excellent job presenting this data and discussing its implications in this link.  http://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/article/?q=YjQ4N2EyMTQ4NzZjZmNlOWQwN2RiNTZjMWZiZDY4YzQ=

 

03.20.2012 at 08:06

Seriously, Trey? National Review is a Republican publication.  Not exactly unbias media. (That article is, however, pretty xenophobic.) I could just as easily Google pro-immigration articles and send you links to the ones from liberal media.  You'd scoff about as loudly as I just did.  The fact that you think National Review is a credible, unbias source says a lot about your constant trolling around here. I'm going to have to start pointing that out every time you accuse CB of being bias.

Also, you completely ignored what I said. (Why am I surprised?) Let me start, again, with this: YES, YOU ARE RIGHT: The current set of Hispanic immigrants are living in an underclass sort of society.

BUT,  I don't understand how you can look at statistics from the CPS and only conclude that Hispanics are failures and should be sent back. The proper follow-up response should be, "Why?" followed by, "What can we do to improve this?" And it would be if those statistics were for caucasian Americans from Republican households.

Finally, they're not complaining about lot in life. And, I'd like to see you, me or any of our friends out working in a sugar cane field. Oh, wait. We wouldn't. I grew up in Florida-The hispanic population here is minute compared to that.  I know how they live and work -- It's not acceptable to me.  But they're happier here than they were where they came from and they're doing jobs no one else wants.

 

03.20.2012 at 01:08

Diedre, National Review is one of the most respected politically conservative publications in America. If your only available response to one of their articles is to cover your ears and sing 'la, la,la,la' to yourself, I'm afraid you are not a very sophisticated consumer of information.  I read articles in very left-leaning publications like the Nation, and while I may approach them with more skeptism than ones more in line with my current ideology, I nevertheless at least try to give them enough serious thought where I can come up with at least an informed critique about the underlying data and not just point and say 'those are them bad people who are trying to trick me into bad thoghts- cover your ears!!, cover your ears!!" .....Furthermore, the article is mostly a presentation of data gathered in longitudinal studies that were conducted by some academics from UCLA, etc. who I believe mostly were/are on the political left.    ................Concerning the belief that if we just try hard enough, we would surely be able to get these immigrants to assimilate, the article points out that there is no program any social scientists has put forward that seems to work on a large scale.  And more generally and more well known to most people, we continue to pump huge sums of money into education in most inner city schools, etc. and despite these significant efforts, we have not really been able to make a serious, wide-ranging dent in the cycle of poverty in this underclass.  ........And finally: concerning the belief that these recent immigrants are some kind of pure-hearted innocents somehow culturally or biologically immune to the the more cynical aspects of modern democracy, the article points out that there has been serious increases in the power of the ethnic lobbying/grievance groups as the numbers of Hispanic immigrants have grown.  Maybe you can rest easy that in the belief that large, educationally/economically underperforming, insular, subnational ethnic groups mostly motivated by in-group loyalties would forever be grateful for the opportunities given to them by those in the oh-so-benevolent American mainstream, but methinks I know a pretty good deal about the almost overwhelming power of political demagoguery in modern politics.

 

03.20.2012 at 03:11

Diedre, here's a well-reasoned article from a liberal pundit back before the liberal position officially flipped from being a close reasoning on likely consequences of mass low-skilled immigration on their supposed main constituency group (the native-born American working class) into a blind counting of possible future votes with almost no thought on what consequences this immigration will have on the economic/social fabric of American life.  http://www.npg.org/forum_series/HuddledExcesses.pdf

 

03.20.2012 at 09:21

Oi. I read the first article, Trey.  I wouldn't not read something just because it's from a conservative source.  My reason for pointing that out was because 1) It was bias...something you like to sulk about on CB and 2) You'd have an easier time getting people/me to take you seriously if you could find information from an unbias source.  When you give someone an article from a completely bias media presence, all that does is make it look like you don't read anything else and like your opinion isn't one that is educated and well-thought-out.  If you want to "win," you have to be better at playing the game.

Speaking of sources, I have a hard time with this claim that there are social scientists that can't come up with a solution.  I don't recall seeing any proof to back up that claim.  Just because some dude writes it, doesn't mean it's true.  Even if we assumed it is true, where exactly did they try these experiental plans? Or did someone else just decide they wouldn't work?  What was tried? Why did it "fail?"  Also, if the adults can't open the child proof bottle, give it to a kid -- Why not talk to some people closer to the situation and see what they can come up with?  I have an aunt who has taught in a school full of migrant workers' kids for over twenty years...I'm pretty sure she and her awesome, committed principal might have a better handle on how to fix things than some academics with a bunch of statistics. And, by the way, she's not a liberal-She just loves humans.

I just don't understand this unwillingness to help and the near hatred I'm seeing (not necessarily from you, Trey).  They're still humans.  It seems like no matter what beliefs you have, you should want to help them.

Finally, I'm not commenting on that second link.  I haven't read it yet.  I will--I promise.  But it's spring break at UC. Please don't make me spend my clear schedule and this beautiful weather arguing with you.

 

03.17.2012 at 02:03 Reply

I guess I should just be amazed that the new left, which purpotedly still has some connections to the old left and its high priority that capitalists can't simply drive down incomes for working class jobs by flooding the market with other low-tech competition, even still addresses this issue.   But to nitpick, the article would have been immeasurably improved if instead of closing by essentially questioning the "religion"of the leader of the groups in question (i.e., has this guy ever shown any signs that he may be an 'atheist' and not a true blue believer in the Church of the Left and its holy multi-culti creed?), it would have stuck with examining in detail the nuts and bolts of the technical qestion:  does this new piece of technology, e-verify, work well enough that it can be implemented on a national scale with only limited operational bugs.

 

03.19.2012 at 05:00

E-cerify like any software application could doubtless be imporved. However it has now been under development since 1998 and it is being used in many huncreds of thousands of business. It is highly accurate. It is very similar to the software that vrdit card companies use to detect and defeat fraudulent perchases. E-verify is already the law in several states and doubtless the experence of these states will provide further empericalo evidence. If you want to try out the system you can do what is called a "self check" by logging in and entering the data your own data. It should tell you if there is any problems with your social security account or if you are clear to work in teh united states.

 

03.20.2012 at 07:19

Thanks for the info hacimo.

 

03.19.2012 at 06:02 Reply

The following quotes are from Alejandro Mayorkas, director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service.03/15/2012

"More than 17 million checks were run through the system in fiscal year 2011."

"We have the capacity currently to process far more queries than we currently handle. And so we can right now handle the expansion of E-Verify to additional states."He also said if e-verfy went National he would need time to accommodate it.

E-verify is very accurate and easy to use, I personally verified myself on self-check a few weeks ago. The SS# Obama is using failed e-verify a while back. He won't address that issue, must be something to it.

 

 

03.20.2012 at 05:50 Reply

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is not a civil rights organization. It is a radical leftist smear operation that often labels law-abiding people it hates as "haters." It sends this information to law enforcement agencies to suggest that they are criminals or potential criminals. The SPLC's contempt for civil liberties is appalling.

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close