A “snag” for Amnesty Bill? Don’t Count on It.
UPDATE: For more about the treacherous creep charged with Homeland Security, click HERE.
Al AP, the voice of Democrats, socialists, liberals, and terrorists, has an article proclaiming a “snag” for the Amnesty Bill. I’ve read the article, but I don’t really see where the “snag” is. Trying to make a case for Chertoff wanting to enforce the law is a joke. He’s not enforcing the laws we have now, and he won’t enforce the new one if it is passed (except for the amnesty part of it).
Perhaps the biggest joke of this article is:
Chertoff called that proposal “a poorly concealed effort to make DHS avoid tough enforcement.”
Since when has DHS attempted “tough” enforcement? Besides strip-searching 80-year-old-granny’s, it’s hard to attribute DHS with any success at all. DHS is nothing but a tolerable name for “Growing government and controlling legal, taxpaying citizens.” Anyhow, from the article:
Immigration bill hits another snag
Chertoff opposes bid to ease workplace verification process
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press
June 21, 2007WASHINGTON - The Bush administration came out strongly against a bipartisan effort by Sens. Charles Grassley and Barack Obama to make the immigration bill easier on employers.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told senators in a letter late Tuesday that the amendment, which makes a new program to stop businesses from hiring illegal workers less burdensome, “would be a serious step backwards in our enforcement effort.”
The amendment sponsored by Grassley, R-Iowa; Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont.; and Obama, D-Ill., “eliminates needed tools and allows unscrupulous businesses to continue to freely hire illegal workers,” Chertoff wrote in matching letters to Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa., two architects of the bill.
In an angrily worded reply to Chertoff on Wednesday, the unlikely allies sponsoring the amendment dismissed his criticism as “erroneous and misleading,” and defended their proposal as one that would improve a deeply flawed system.
The proposal by Grassley, Baucus and Obama addresses the worker verification program, which is despised by both labor and business groups. Businesses fear it would wreak havoc with their ability to hire workers and impose exorbitant costs. Labor organizations worry it could result in discrimination against workers.
The same interests are eagerly pushing for the broader immigration overhaul, which would legalize some 12 million unlawful immigrants and create a new temporary guest worker program.
The proposal would ease the measure’s strict requirements for employers to verify that all their workers are legal, instead allowing businesses to check only the identities of new employees and those existing ones who the Department of Homeland Security has reason to believe are unlawful.
It would strip a requirement that employees present a federally standardized “REAL ID,” instead allowing them to produce other driver’s license or identity cards.
Workers denied a job under the system could appeal to Department of Homeland Security for lost wages.
Chertoff called that proposal “a poorly concealed effort to make DHS avoid tough enforcement.”
