Is the Arizona Immigration law about JOBS?

[bobbyw24]

What I Told CBS News Tonight About Arizona Law -- It's About Jobs

By Roy Beck

I was asked about all the charges that the new law will create discrimination against people who look foreign.

My response was that the failure to push illegal aliens out of jobs and this country has created huge discrimination against the most vulnerable members of our society, disproportionately against Black Americans, Hispanic Americans and immigrants who are here legally. Laws like the one Arizona just passed will disproportionately help U.S. minorities, including legal immigrants.

These states are in the third year of a jobs depression. Immigration laws should be protecting Americans from being out of work because of foreign workers.

Instead, the federal government has refused to act. And the President of the United States repeatedly takes the side of the illegal aliens (and the companies that hire them) against the interests of unemployed Americans. In response to the Arizona law, Pres. Obama called again for giving 7 million illegal workers permanent work permits.

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/april-24-2010/what-i-told-cbs-news-tonight-about-arizona-law-its-about-jobs.html

[MelissaWV]

My response was that the failure to push illegal aliens out of jobs and this country has created huge discrimination against the most vulnerable members of our society, disproportionately against Black Americans, Hispanic Americans and immigrants who are here legally. Laws like the one Arizona just passed will disproportionately help U.S. minorities, including legal immigrants.



If that's help, then please don't help me, Government :p

[angelatc]

If that's help, then please don't help me, Government :p

So you don't want the government to force people off the welfare rolls?

There's a reason that unemployment is 25% in Detroit. I've seen in action during the Clinton years.

The labor market was forcing people off the welfare rolls and into the workforce. Employers were being forced to hire any warm body they could attract, using higher wages and benefits like shuttles to and from the inner city. They were aggressively seeking the young black men to fill positions, and it was working. For a brief moment, I saw that hope that we wouldn't all go bankrupt.

But corporate America didn't want to pay higher wages, so they signed NAFTA and opened the borders.

[AlexMerced]

ummm... this will kill tourism in arizona... this wouldn't create jobs at all, if you want to get people off welfare rolls just end welfare... period.

[angelatc]

ummm... this will kill tourism in arizona... this wouldn't create jobs at all, if you want to get people off welfare rolls just end welfare... period.

You don't think making work pay more than welfare is a viable plan to phase out welfare? Really?

Because just pulling the rug out simply not going to happen. Even I wouldn't go for that.

[bobbyw24]

You don't think making work pay more than welfare is a viable plan to phase out welfare? Really?

Because just pulling the rug out simply not going to happen. Even I wouldn't go for that.

I know-so many people here say "Just end welfare." It just ain't gonna happen soon or easily if at all. And most of the new immigrants coming are poor and will be voters in the future-they will vote to continue the welfare programs in perpetuity.

[Southron]

I know-so many people here say "Just end welfare." It just ain't gonna happen soon or easily if at all. And most of the new immigrants coming are poor and will be voters in the future-they will vote to continue the welfare programs in perpetuity.

This is true. There is no political will to end welfare.

[MelissaWV]

So you don't want the government to force people off the welfare rolls?

There's a reason that unemployment is 25% in Detroit. I've seen in action during the Clinton years.

The labor market was forcing people off the welfare rolls and into the workforce. Employers were being forced to hire any warm body they could attract, using higher wages and benefits like shuttles to and from the inner city. They were aggressively seeking the young black men to fill positions, and it was working. For a brief moment, I saw that hope that we wouldn't all go bankrupt.

But corporate America didn't want to pay higher wages, so they signed NAFTA and opened the borders.

The new law in Arizona is misguided and targets the wrong people together with the right ones. It's a "baby with the bathwater" scenario. To heal the economy, all that has to happen is that a chunk of legal citizens have to give up their Constitutional rights? I don't really buy that.

I've already talked ad nauseum about what sections of society could be targeted without discriminating, and it would get rid of illegals regardless of ethnicity... instead, though, we get the Arizona law.

[ladyjade3]

I know-so many people here say "Just end welfare." It just ain't gonna happen soon or easily if at all. And most of the new immigrants coming are poor and will be voters in the future-they will vote to continue the welfare programs in perpetuity.

Why can't they just check your documentation before they give you welfare? Or food stamps, or even let your kid go to public school? I would think its a no-brainer that benefits paid for with taxes are reserved for citizens.

[MelissaWV]

Why can't they just check your documentation before they give you welfare? Or food stamps, or even let your kid go to public school? I would think its a no-brainer that benefits paid for with taxes are reserved for citizens.

I've been saying this for days. It gets me called pro-Amnesty.

Documentation can also be checked when applying for employment, with better enforcement and spot-checking to ensure birth certificates/immigration papers are valid.

If someone's 'here illegally' and not injuring anyone or committing another crime, leeching public benefits, working here, and might even be contributing to the local economy... But nope. Instead of addressing the problems, people are more into their pet law :rolleyes:

[pcosmar]

Is the Arizona Immigration law about JOBS?

NO
It is about the REAL ID

Everything else is smokescreen and selling points.

[Stary Hickory]

NO
It is about the REAL ID

Everything else is smokescreen and selling points.

No it's im part a response to unemployment(poorly understood) but also it is to try and offset a influx of people who do not care about property rights and individual liberty. Many believe the illegal imigrants will fall prey to politcal demogauguery and become a serious dependent class, preying on Americans using the government as a weapon.

If theft using the government was not possible, then people would not fear imigrants coming in. They could only benefit us. The problem is we have a track record in America of one party using minorities in order to gain political power. In return they offer them more of the belongings and slave labor of those the political party is able to gain control over.

It is a sick and detrimental relationship. No one wants to see this continue. It's immoral and destructive to our economy. Kill the welfare state and imigration is no longer an issue. People complaining about illegal imigration hurting employment are being silly. We can always use more hardworkers in the US. As long as they are working, which is why before we have some kind of open borders we need to eliminate the avenue towards theft and plundering.

We don't need people motivated to come here based on the percieved benefits of robbing others via the government.

[MelissaWV]

No it's im part a response to unemployment(poorly understood) but also it is to try and offset a influx of people who do not care about property rights and individual liberty. Many believe the illegal imigrants will fall prey to politcal demogauguery and become a serious dependent class, preying on Americans using the government as a weapon.

If theft using the government was not possible, then people would not fear imigrants coming in. They could only benefit us. The problem is we have a track record in America of one party using minorities in order to gain political power. In return they offer them more of the belongings and slave labor of those the political party is able to gain control over.

It is a sick and detrimental relationship. No one wants to see this continue. It's immoral and destructive to our economy. Kill the welfare state and imigration is no longer an issue. People complaining about illegal imigration hurting employment are being silly. We can always use more hardworkers in the US. As long as they are working, which is why before we have some kind of open borders we need to eliminate the avenue towards theft and plundering.

We don't need people motivated to come here based on the percieved benefits of robbing others via the government.

Yeah, but the bolded part's a little ironic, don't you think? Given that the Arizona law is directly contrary to:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Of course, that particular "piece of paper" uses that pesky "probable cause" clause, too, so that needs to be defined as pertains to these cases.

* * *

Somehow, I get it in the butt from all these laws. I end up paying taxes for others, supporting their kids, footing the bill for programs I'll never use, and in general getting the crappy end of the stick via snide little "brown people" comments. Hurray. Thank you, Government.

[Stary Hickory]

Yeah, but the bolded part's a little ironic, don't you think? Given that the Arizona law is directly contrary to:



Of course, that particular "piece of paper" uses that pesky "probable cause" clause, too, so that needs to be defined as pertains to these cases.

* * *

Somehow, I get it in the butt from all these laws. I end up paying taxes for others, supporting their kids, footing the bill for programs I'll never use, and in general getting the crappy end of the stick via snide little "brown people" comments. Hurray. Thank you, Government.

and where have I stated support for the AZ law?

[angelatc]

The new law in Arizona is misguided and targets the wrong people together with the right ones. It's a "baby with the bathwater" scenario. To heal the economy, all that has to happen is that a chunk of legal citizens have to give up their Constitutional rights? I don't really buy that.

I've already talked ad nauseum about what sections of society could be targeted without discriminating, and it would get rid of illegals regardless of ethnicity... instead, though, we get the Arizona law.

I hear you, but I don't respectfully agree. I don't like putting the responsibility, specially the sole responsibility, on employers. They have enough on their plates already. That system has already failed. And the potential for political abuse of power is staggering.

Want to guess how often the Democratic companies would get audited in this administration? Would the oil companies have been checked under Bush's tenure?

There is no way that this law will be allowed to stand if the police are allowed to randomly card people on the street. But when they're arrested for driving drunk, or domestic battery, or they're enrolling their kids in school - they're already required to produce documents.

If you are a citizen of Arizona, and you have a driver's license, it won't change anything for you.

[Stary Hickory]

I hear you, but I don't respectfully agree. I don't like putting the responsibility, specially the sole on employers. They have enough on their plates already. That system has already failed. And the potential for political abuse of power is staggering.

Want to guess how often the Democratic companies would get audited in this administration? Would the oil companies have been checked under Bush's tenure?

There is no way that this law will be allowed to stand if the police are allowed to randomly card people on the street. But when they're arrested for driving drunk, or domestic battery, or they're enrolling their kids in school - they're already required to produce documents.

If you are a citizen of Arizona, and you have a driver's license, it won't change anything for you.

So this is the law? The way people were going on it was like random checks. I wholeheartedly support this then. This is precisely when governmetn should check these things.

That means people here are arguing for open borders, and that is insane. Really insane. I thought for sure it was random checks, but if all people are checked then this is quite fine. Espeically when arrested or using governmetn services. If we are not willing to check them then....then how can anyone here honestly tell me they do not support illegal imigration?

People try and stop every possible avenue of enforcement yet say they are against illegal imigration?

[nandnor]

So you don't want the government to force people off the welfare rolls?

There's a reason that unemployment is 25% in Detroit. I've seen in action during the Clinton years.

The labor market was forcing people off the welfare rolls and into the workforce. Employers were being forced to hire any warm body they could attract, using higher wages and benefits like shuttles to and from the inner city. They were aggressively seeking the young black men to fill positions, and it was working. For a brief moment, I saw that hope that we wouldn't all go bankrupt.

But corporate America didn't want to pay higher wages, so they signed NAFTA and opened the borders.Youre Totally clueless buddy. Ever heard of Austrian Business Cycle Theory?

[MelissaWV]

So this is the law? The way people were going on it was like random checks. I wholeheartedly support this then. This is precisely when governmetn should check these things.

That means people here are arguing for open borders, and that is insane. Really insane. I thought for sure it was random checks, but if all people are checked then this is quite fine. Espeically when arrested or using governmetn services. If we are not willing to check them then....then how can anyone here honestly tell me they do not support illegal imigration?

People try and stop every possible avenue of enforcement yet say they are against illegal imigration?

You should read the bill for yourself and decide. I, at least, was assuming you had...

You may be checked if you are suspected of being illegal. What's an illegal look like?

There are employer checks, too, using e-verify. It wasn't long ago people here were rallying against e-verify, saying it was a horrible idea. Here it is in this bill, and people can't get enough of it.

I have already said numerous times we should check at 1) employment, 2) taxpayer-provided welfare/services, 3) entry into the country (obviously), and 4) when another crime is already taking place. If you are driving without a license, for instance, that's a blind offense. If you are standing near a Home Depot, and you don't have a license, why does your 4th Amendment right not really count?

[Stary Hickory]

You should read the bill for yourself and decide. I, at least, was assuming you had...

You may be checked if you are suspected of being illegal. What's an illegal look like?

There are employer checks, too, using e-verify. It wasn't long ago people here were rallying against e-verify, saying it was a horrible idea. Here it is in this bill, and people can't get enough of it.

I have already said numerous times we should check at 1) employment, 2) taxpayer-provided welfare/services, 3) entry into the country (obviously), and 4) when another crime is already taking place. If you are driving without a license, for instance, that's a blind offense. If you are standing near a Home Depot, and you don't have a license, why does your 4th Amendment right not really count?

Ok well then I would have to disgree with random checks. There would be hispanic American citizens subject to something completey unethical. So I am 90% in support of the AZ law minus random subjective stops. That kind of enforcement I cannot get behind at all.

[MelissaWV]

Ok well then I would have to disgree with random checks. There would be hispanic American citizens subject to something completey unethical. So I am 90% in support of the AZ law minus random subjective stops. That kind of enforcement I cannot get behind at all.


E. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITHOUT A WARRANT, MAY ARREST A PERSON IF THE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON HAS COMMITTED ANY PUBLIC OFFENSE THAT MAKES THE PERSON REMOVABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES.


Any person who is not a U.S. citizen can be deported from the United States.

https://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/deportation.html


If an alien is determined to be in the United States illegally for any reason, he or she is a deportable alien.

http://www.gioffredi.com/pdf/GroundsforDeportation.pdf


I. For the purposes of this section, proof of verifying the employment authorization of an employee through the e-verify program creates a rebuttable presumption that an employer did not knowingly employ an unauthorized alien.

23-214. Verification of employment eligibility; e-verify program; economic development incentives; list of registered employers

A. After December 31, 2007, every employer, after hiring an employee, shall verify the employment eligibility of the employee through the e-verify program AND SHALL KEEP A RECORD OF THE VERIFICATION FOR THE DURATION OF THE EMPLOYEE'S EMPLOYMENT OR AT LEAST THREE YEARS, WHICHEVER IS LONGER.

B. In addition to any other requirement for an employer to receive an economic development incentive from a government entity, the employer shall register with and participate in the e-verify program. Before receiving the economic development incentive, the employer shall provide proof to the government entity that the employer is registered with and is participating in the e-verify program. If the government entity determines that the employer is not complying with this subsection, the government entity shall notify the employer by certified mail of the government entity's determination of noncompliance and the employer's right to appeal the determination. On a final determination of noncompliance, the employer shall repay all monies received as an economic development incentive to the government entity within thirty days of the final determination.

Here's a longer list of activities which are removable offenses. Some of them make excellent sense, and some do not. Bear in mind the bill says you need only be suspected of the following:


The following list includes the various types of deportable aliens. If you need further
information about any of the categories or about deportation in general, an immigration attorney
can help you.
____ Anyone who was inadmissible at the time of entry into the United States
____ Anyone who was inadmissible at the time of an adjustment of status
____ Aliens who are present in the United States in violation of any U.S. law
____ Aliens who fail to maintain their nonimmigrant status
____ Aliens who fail to comply with conditions placed on their entry into the United States
____ Persons whose conditional permanent residence status has terminated
____ Persons engaged in smuggling aliens into the United States, except in certain cases involving family reunification
____ Aliens who engage in marriage fraud
____ Aliens who are convicted of crimes of moral turpitude within five years, or ten years in the case of some aliens granted lawful permanent resident status, of the time of entry, if a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed
____ Aliens who are convicted of two or more separate crimes involving moral turpitude, regardless of whether they are imprisoned
____ Aliens who are convicted of an aggravated felony, which includes
√ Murder, rape, or sexual abuse of a minor
√ Illicit trafficking in controlled substances
√ Firearms, destructive devices, and explosive materials offenses
√ Money laundering
√ Crimes of violence for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year
√ Theft and burglary offenses for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year
√ Crimes involving the demand for or receipt of ransom
√ Crimes involving child pornography
√ Crimes involving a violation of the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act
√ A second or subsequent gambling offense for which a one-year or greater term of imprisonment may be imposed
√ Prostitution “managing” and transporting offenses
√ Crimes against the government
√ Offenses that jeopardize national security
√ Offenses that involve fraud or deceit in which the victims’ aggregate losses exceed $10,000
√ Tax evasion involving a government loss in excess of $10,000
√ Alien smuggling, except for first offenses involving attempts to enable entry by a relative of the accused
√ Certain offenses committed by aliens who were previously deported for having committed a crime
√ Passport fraud offenses with a term of imprisonment of one year or greater, except for first offenses involving attempts to enable entry by a relative of the accused
√ Failure to appear to serve a sentence for which the underlying offense is punishable by imprisonment for five or more years
√ Offenses involving commercial bribery, counterfeiting, forgery, or trafficking in vehicles with altered identification numbers with a term of imprisonment of at least one year
√ Offenses involving obstruction of justice, perjury, subornation of perjury, and witness tampering with a term of imprisonment of at least one year
√ Failure to appear in court pursuant to court order to answer to a felony charge for which a sentence of two or more years’ imprisonment may be imposed
____ Aliens who engage in high-speed flight from an immigration checkpoint
____ Aliens convicted of an offense involving controlled substances, other than a single offense involving possession of thirty grams or less of marijuana for personal use
____ Drug abusers or addicts
____ Aliens convicted of certain firearm or destructive device offenses
____ Aliens convicted of certain crimes against the government for which a term of imprisonment of five years or more may be imposed
____ Violators of the Selective Service Act
____ Violators of the Trading with the Enemy Act
____ Aliens convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, stalking, violation of a protective order, or child abuse
____ Violators of the Alien Registration Act, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, and other federal laws relating to alien registration
____ Persons engaging in falsification of immigration documents
____ Aliens who falsely represent themselves to be U.S. citizens
____ Aliens who engage in activities jeopardizing the national security
____ Aliens who engage in terrorist activity
____ Aliens whose presence in the United States would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences
____ Aliens who become a public charge within five years of entry as a result of causes not arising post-entry
____ Aliens who vote unlawfully

I did learn something from the checklist. "Prostitute Manager" lol.

[Stary Hickory]

Not gonna quote all that but I still don't see where it autorized random stops. If somone makes apublic offense is that not a violation of the law? If so fine check anyone who breaks the law. If you are in violation of the law and an officer approaches you on it and ask for ID....well I think that's fine.

[MelissaWV]

Not gonna quote all that but I still don't see where it autorized random stops. If somone makes apublic offense is that not a violation of the law? If so fine check anyone who breaks the law. If you are in violation of the law and an officer approaches you on it and ask for ID....well I think that's fine.

Suspicion of a public offense that makes you a removable alien. As I posted, any one of those things (including being an illegal) makes you removable. In other words, you are suspected of being an illegal, and therefore must demonstrate that you are not, even if that is your only suspected crime. It is absolutely justified.

If I see you standing outside of Home Depot with a lot of brown-skinned people, I might have a reasonable suspicion that you are illega. You also might be legal and just waiting for a ride. You might be stopped there texting or answering a cellphone call. It does not matter, though; you are suspicious to me, so I have the right to demand your papers. The young, in particular, will not have those papers on them.

I am in agreement with angela that it'd be stupid for Arizona to interpret it this way and get involved in lawsuits all over the place, though there are already rumblings of the US "fixing" this law. Perhaps that's the point?