Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

The one sure immigration fix

By ROBYN E. BLUMNER
Published April 30, 2006

What to do about the nation's 11-million illegal immigrants has members of both parties twisting themselves in knots.

Democrats want to appease Hispanics, while not selling out their base of low-skilled workers who compete with illegal aliens for jobs. Republicans want to appear conducive to a law-and-order approach while not disrupting the cheap and exploitable work force on which their business constituency relies.

This tug and tussle of competing interests has our hand-wringing Congress frozen in indecision. It's stuck between a House-passed immigration reform measure that would have us erecting a massive fence along our border with Mexico and making felons of illegal aliens, and a Senate approach of eventual amnesty along with a guest worker program.

Beyond some promising employee verification requirements in the House version, I'm not partial to the primary elements of either package. An American-style Berlin Wall would be a giant gash on our land, offending our spirit of welcome toward legal immigrants. Offering an amnesty program, no matter how many hoops are attached, would only encourage others to subvert our laws in hopes of a similar capitulation in another 20 years.

Remember the amnesty of 1986? It was touted as a "one-time only" pass, since border and work-site enforcement would follow. It didn't happen.

There is only one way to keep poorly paid people from Latin America and Asia from smuggling themselves into the United States: deny them a job. We don't have to deport 11-million illegal aliens, which, as the president suggested, would be impossible. If the work dries up, they will leave of their own accord. Employers are the key, and everyone knows it.

It is on the jobs front that the hypocrisy of our leaders becomes so maddeningly apparent. From 1997 to 2005, we added 4,300 agents to patrol our borders, increasing the force to 11,100 and making it appear as though the government was getting serious about a crackdown. But at the same time, the number of federal immigration agents who investigated work-site compliance actually went down, from 240 in 1999 to 65 in 2004, according to the Government Accountability Office. The same study found that the number of notices of intent to fine employers who had hired illegal aliens dropped to three in 2004. At least 7-million illegal immigrants are estimated to be working, but our immigration service could only find three employers hiring them.

Earlier this month, Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff made a big show of arresting 1,100 illegal immigrants and seven managers at a large pallet supply company based in Houston. The managers had allegedly paid an undercover agent for fraudulent documents for the illegal workers and engaged in other immigration no-nos. Prosecuting them is a good step. Now multiply that by 1,000 and we'll start making progress.

When the government fails to do its duty, enterprising people take it upon themselves. The Minutemen Project was formed to observe illegal migrants crossing the Arizona-Mexico border and alert border agents. There is nothing wrong with what these people are doing; they are filling a vacuum.

Howard Foster, a Chicago corporate attorney, is another innovator. He has filed a handful of lawsuits on behalf of citizen-employees who claim their wages have been depressed by their company hiring illegal aliens, and he's using our organized crime statutes to do it.

In 1996, Congress added the hiring of illegal aliens as a predicate crime that could trigger the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, RICO, and the possibility of treble damages. In a suit heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, Foster charges that the RICO laws can be applied to otherwise legitimate companies that conspire with contractors to hire undocumented workers.

Mohawk Industries Inc. vs. Williams is a case that should bring sweat beads to the upper lips of any employer who uses intermediaries to find illegal workers. Foster's suit against the Georgia-based carpet giant, Mohawk, which employs 30,000 workers, alleges that a significant number of the company's workers have faulty Social Security numbers and that the company helped labor recruiters with "a supply of Social Security cards for use when a prospective or existing employees need(ed) to assume a new identity."

If true, and the company denies it is, it sure sounds like an organized criminal enterprise.

Supporters of guest worker programs and amnesty point to our low unemployment statistics and say we need those workers. I don't buy it. Official unemployment figures are misleading since they don't include people who have given up looking. Offer a living wage and provide decent benefits and you'll have a work force.

But if more workers are needed, then we should address the shortfall by opening up our legal immigration process far wider for those who have properly waited their turn.

[Last modified May 1, 2006, 09:41:39]