No intelligent person ever assumes that legislation will solve a problem. More often intelligent people assume legislation will create more problems rather than solve anything. The current status of one piece of legislation does raise some interesting questions.
Conservative, tea-party and libertarian groups have joined liberals in fighting a signature Republican bill in Congress that would crack down on illegal-immigrant workers. The legislation, they argue, would hurt businesses and employees while expanding government regulation.
I have no recollection of opposition to E-verify from ‘conservative, tea party and libertarian groups’ before the current version of related legislation began making its way through the 112th Congress.
Could it be that as long as the system was voluntary no one politically right of center opposed it but since it may become mandatory opinions are changing? If that is the case then those supporting it before and opposing it now are disingenuous at best or worse, dishonest.
Everyone I know personally with an opinion on the matter has from the beginning or over time come to agree that eliminating job opportunities for illegals is the most practical way to end these immigration problems.
For new opposition to the E-verify system to appear just as legislation to make it mandatory is produced in Congress smells bad. Perhaps those suggesting it was impossible to deport all the illegals in this country were closet liberals all in for shamnesty. Now that the limitations of voluntary E-verify would be replaced by manditory E-verify they fear the reality that self-deportation will work.
Some POL from California praised another piece of legislation that would sustain the illegal ag workforce in that state expressing those opposed to it did not understand the situation. Oh yes, we understand the situation quite well. Too many people in this country publicly express opposition to illegal immigration but privately do everything they can to sustain it. It is of course a disease that has infected the true spirit of free markets. Some believe ignoring the rule of law is okay when pursuing profit.
Here’s an example of the problem.
“The bill doesn’t stem the tide of illegal immigration,” said Andrew Langer, president of the Institute for Liberty, an antiregulation group. Instead, he said, “it adds to the burden on small business when the economy is in the doldrums—a baffling idea.”
Translation: Removing the illegal workforce impacts my bottom line as I can pay them less than legal citizens, etc., etc.
The only reasonable opposition to E-verify involves typical problems with any government process. To reject the legislation on that alone is ridiculous. Opponents are looking for popular talking points to oppose the legislation because the underlying reason of support for shamnesty is a loser.
If opponents to E-verify are troubled by ‘mission creep’ or other additions that may be in the legislation then they should address those items, not reject the entire bill. If they continue this push it looks like what it is; support for shamnesty.
In other words, the current opposition to E-verify referenced in this post is a classic example of throwing the baby out with the bath water.