Feds to file suit against AZ imigration law

[Jarochai Alabaster]

Embar,

I don't know specifically about the story Partha mentioned, but Ddrak linked to one of the articles I've read on the subject. Here's another.

And yes, illegal immigrants are purchasing goods and services in the US. They need food to survive. They need shelter to survive. Yes, money gets sent back to Mexico. Money would still be going to Mexico if they were legal guest workers under the model you've previously proposed (And I agree with, I'll add), so I'm failing to see the issue you have with that.

Even if the studies citing illegal immigrants bolstering our economy are wrong, we'd still be looking at a prohibitively expensive undertaking in kicking them all out. We would need to hire tens of thousands of new INS employees, and is that something we really want to be doing at this juncture? Beyond that, you've admitted we need them for farm labor if nothing else, and the article Ddrak linked reinforced that.

A crackdown in illegal immigration in 2004 caused a shortage of workers needed to bring in the lettuce crop in the Western United States, said Powell, which he said caused a $1 billion loss for the industry as many growers had to leave their fields unharvested.

"To hire Americans to do it, they would have had to raise wages so far, it wouldn't have been worth it for them," said Powell at the Independent Institute. "It caused less of a loss to leave the crop to rot."

So, many of our crops would die in the fields, or the price of these goods will skyrocket. Inflated food prices are another thing American's don't want to deal with (And many of us simply can't take on) right now. We'd either see an explosion in EBT claims, or the impoverished class will just starve out.

I'm all for finding a reasonable solution, and I think you've got it with the guest worker program. But for now, as we've all noticed, neither party truly wants to do anything about it.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I absolutely am for a guest worker program. The US needs the cheap labor. I am absoultely against our current immigration policy, which is just for show. And I think most Americans would embrace a guest worker program, except those Americans that pay illegals under the table to avoid the payroll taxes (which is where the US and states really get hit)

If the guest worker program had these elements, I think it would have overwhelming support from the American people:
1. You HAVE to be issues a guest worker permit or have a valid visa to be in the US.
2. If you're here without a visa or permit, you're never allowed back in.
3. Children born on US soil are US citiszens IF the person is here legally, otherwise they aren't.
4. Elminate minimum wage for guest workers
5. Collect payroll taxes for guest workers
6. Any employer hiring an illegal immigrant does hard jail time, and has a forfeiture of assets equal to the amount of taxes the wages of the illegal would have produced (hell, this alone, if enforced, would drop the hiring of illegals to a mere trickle)
7. If you're legal and paying taxes, you get access to social services (education, health clinics, etc) If not, you don't.
8. They pay in to Social Security, but they don't get anything from it.

Do that, and add a background check (no felons), and you'd have a workng guest worker program.

But we could certainly start by vigorously prosecuting emlpoyers who hire illegals.

[Lurker]

The Obama Administration has been going after employers who hire illegal workers, just in a more quiet and efficient manner than the prior Administration.

Seems to me we could let unemployment run out, enforce illegal immigration laws and send them back to their native countries, which would open up work for Americans.

But that makes too much sense.

Just out of curiousity, do you really believe that's a viable solution? I have to ask, because you take something that has a grain of truth (removing illegal workers would open up jobs for legal workers) and turn it into a cartoonish and unworkable suggestion that would harm millions of Americans every bit as much as Republican obstruction has.

=====

The brief in response to the DoJ brief is strong but I have the same problem with it that Ddrak has.

[Embar Angylwrath]

The Obama Administration has been going after employers who hire illegal workers, just in a more quiet and efficient manner than the prior Administration.

Seems to me we could let unemployment run out, enforce illegal immigration laws and send them back to their native countries, which would open up work for Americans.

But that makes too much sense.

Just out of curiousity, do you really believe that's a viable solution? I have to ask, because you take something that has a grain of truth (removing illegal workers would open up jobs for legal workers) and turn it into a cartoonish and unworkable suggestion that would harm millions of Americans every bit as much as Republican obstruction has.

=====

The brief in response to the DoJ brief is strong but I have the same problem with it that Ddrak has.

I don't think we could put every American back to work by replacing illegal immigrant labor with citizen labor, but I do think we could make a dent in the unemployment rate by doing as much of the job swap out as possible. Particulary here in California, which has a huge unemployment rate. I think we both can agree that spending money generated from employment is better than spending money from an unemployment check. Any step we can take to remove Americans from the unemployment rolls, we should do, no matter how incremental, don't you agree? Do you have some fundamental issue with putting Americans to work?

[Embar Angylwrath]

From the article you posted Lurker...

After the firings, Gebbers Farms advertised hundreds of jobs for orchard workers. But there were few takers in the state.

One wonders if there was no more unemployment extensions, if he would have had a better response for the help wanted.

Also, the policy of firing the illegal immigrants but not deporting them is assinine.. it just kicks the can down the road and works at cross purposes to the policy, since the illegals will just look for more work elsewhere. Im glad to see that employers are getting popped though.

[Ddrak]

On Embar's criteria:

1. You HAVE to be issues a guest worker permit or have a valid visa to be in the US.
Isn't this already the case? Really, the guest worker permit would just be another "H" class visa, I assume?

2. If you're here without a visa or permit, you're never allowed back in.
Well, given the assumption that they weren't allowed in the first place, this is a little pointless. I'm also opposed to laws with absolutes like this in them because they tend to catch people here accidentally. I'll happily admit I didn't have my I94 on me 100% of the time for all 7 years when I was in the US (it was stashed safely at home), which would technically put me foul of the law here, and probably foul of AZ's law as well. I actually think that part of the law is flat out stupid given the I94 is a little square of paper that will disintegrate in months...

3. Children born on US soil are US citiszens IF the person is here legally, otherwise they aren't.
Nah - need to be stronger. I'd say children are only citizens if the person is here on a full immigrant visa (ie green card). Otherwise the children automatically receive the best non-immigrant status of their parents (so H1-B kids get H1-Bs).

4. Elminate minimum wage for guest workers
This is dodgy. I don't know how to deal with the wage levels, but if you do this you're giving guest workers a massive boost over Americans which will cause all sorts of issues. I think you'd have to take the "green card" approach and mandate that you can only hire guest workers where you can't get resident workers.

5. Collect payroll taxes for guest workers
Obviously, and income taxes.

6. Any employer hiring an illegal immigrant does hard jail time, and has a forfeiture of assets equal to the amount of taxes the wages of the illegal would have produced (hell, this alone, if enforced, would drop the hiring of illegals to a mere trickle)
Given the state of CA's prisons already, I think this is going to end up badly. Fine them the equivalent minimum wage of the person/people employed.

7. If you're legal and paying taxes, you get access to social services (education, health clinics, etc) If not, you don't.
What about people on non-working visas? H-4's for example?

8. They pay in to Social Security, but they don't get anything from it.
Yeah, that's already the case for any non-immigrant visa. I paid a bucket into SS for the time I was there but won't ever see anything from it. You can thank me later.

Do that, and add a background check (no felons)
Would mandatory background checks be worthless given the number of people you're talking about? I'd say you randomly sample, as well as picking the ones that look high risk. Of course, "felon" doesn't necessarily have a meaning in other countries so you'd have to define it a bit better than just "no felons".


One of my real beefs with the AZ law is the issue of having to carry papers. Previously if you left them at home it was a wrist slap from the INS. I'm guessing US citizens mostly have no idea of the stupidity of the I94 thing?

Dd

[Fallakin Kuvari]

You can thank me later.

As if any of us will see anything from it...

[Jarochai Alabaster]

You can thank me later.

As if any of us will see anything from it...

Are you suggesting none of us will draw from Social Security?

[Fallakin Kuvari]

The fund will either be insolvent (and its already in the red) or they'll have made changes to raise the Age required to receive funds from SSI to such a degree that many people will never benefit from it.

[Partha]

Embar, you are a liar of great facility.

The report has been critizied as flawed becasue even though it captured some costs, it didn't capture all the costs (it left out the cost of education).

http://www.window.state.tx.us/specialrp ... ation.html

The Comptroller’s office estimates that there were about 135,000 undocumented children in Texas public schools during the 2004-05 school year, or about 3 percent of total public school enrollment. Dr. Jeffery Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center estimated that there were 140,000 undocumented students in Texas public and private schools in 2001-02.[11] Applying the eight percent growth in total student enrollment from 2001-02 to 2004-05 school year (fiscal 2005) to the estimated 140,000 undocumented students resulted in an estimated 151,182 students in 2004-2005. A U.S. Government Accountability Office report’s estimates that 89.3 percent of Texas students are enrolled in public school. That was applied to the estimated number of undocumented children in school, resulting in an estimated 135,013 undocumented students in Texas public schools.[12]

The Texas Education Agency reports that, during 2004-05, the average state and local expenditure per student was $7,085 (this excludes federal funds). Applying this figure to the estimated number of undocumented immigrant children in public schools, the Comptroller estimates that the cost of educating undocumented children in 2004-05 was slightly less than $957 million (Exhibit 3).

Now, explain how a section titled EDUCATION neglects to discuss education costs. Then you can explain how and where you saying that immigrants produce no economic activity with no sources is any better than me providing a counter number with no sources, given your deplorable (and continuous) record of not clicking on links or doing any basic study...which you reinforced here by lying about the Comptroller's Report.

[Kulaf]

Well by your own quote of illegals adding 17.7 billion to the state economy of Texas because "they eat and buy cars and rent houses and shit." is a bit of an economic wonder. Considering the 17.7 billion represents Gross Regional Product which represents an economies output and value added and has nothing to do with end consumption. That 17.7 billion figure represents the loss of cheap labor to the market and not much more.

I can't find anything in that report that deals with consumption by illegals other than as it relates to revenues and expenses of the State and local governments. The net impact to the state of TX is a positive 424.7 million dollars in revenue. However the impact to local governments and hospitals is a negative 928.9 million in revenue.

[Embar Angylwrath]

And the comptroller cherry-picked the educational cost data. Which is why I said the financial info wasn't fully captured. Educational costs for illegals in Texas approach 4 billion, not the 900 or so million in the comptrollers report. Partha can't get his head around that so he resorts to name calling.

Don't get me wrong, I think we need the cheap labor. The other side of the equation is how much the costs of certain goods and services would increase if not for the depressive forces on costs from paying an illegal $3/hour versus a US citizen $7-$8/hour for the same work. As I've stated before, most Americans would freak out if American labor cost was added to the price of a watermelon or box of strawberries or bag of oranges.

But if the argument is soley about cost to governments and injection of capital into the economy, the argument clearly favors kicking the illegals out on that single basis.

Give them an ID, collect taxes on their wages, and abolish the minimum wage for foreign born workers. If they want to work here on the cheap, it only benefits the US in the long run. Thats the solution, its an easy fix, as long as there aren't factions clamoring that they have a right to minimum wage.... which I imagine would be the political battleground upon which this fight will be fought.

They already aren't getting minimum wage, and we don't need to reward illegal actions with a wage increase. They are here to work for what they think is an acceptable wage, don't change that or you WILL fuck over the economy.

Dd has been the only one to address that particular topic. Partha and Lurker, and our ever-more left leaning Harlowe have stayed silent on it. So have Kulaf, Tora and Fall on the right. I'm interested to hear what each side thinks about eliminating minimum wage for foreign workers.

[Harlowe]

Dear evermore right-leaning Embar. I can't speak to this, I'm not informed enough on it to have an opinion, but I can't say I disagree with anything Ddrak has posted.

It's Summer in MN, I'm not watching a lot of news, reading news on the net or newspapers. BP, Sherrod, yes I pay attention to some of it, but I'm playing.....pretty much all the time. I'm not going to pretend to be engaged in most of this.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Dear evermore right-leaning Embar. I can't speak to this, I'm not informed enough on it to have an opinion, but I can't say I disagree with anything Ddrak has posted.

It's Summer in MN, I'm not watching a lot of news, reading news on the net or newspapers. BP, Sherrod, yes I pay attention to some of it, but I'm playing.....pretty much all the time. I'm not going to pretend to be engaged in most of this.

Fair enough. Summer in MN is too short to get all worked up by a Rants board... in San Diego, where it's summer for most of the year... I got time.

I do take exception though to the ever=more right leaning comment though. I'm still the same 'ol free market, don't touch my freedoms as long as they don't touch yours, socially liberal (legalize pot and gay marriage) guy I was when I hit this board many moons ago.

[Kulaf]

You look a little futher to the right because Harlow has moved a bit further to the left.

[Kulaf]

Necessity being the mother of invention and all that.....if you pay migrant workers too much you will spur someone to make a better (insert fruit/vegetable here) picker and put them all out of work anyway. So pay what the market will stand.

[Lurker]

Or Harlowe looks a little further to the left because Embar has moved a bit further to the right. See how that works?

People have been accusing Harlowe of being a closet liberal or "moving to the left" for years she must be to the left of Kucinich by now.

====

Embar, here's what Ddrak said...

4. Elminate minimum wage for guest workers
This is dodgy. I don't know how to deal with the wage levels, but if you do this you're giving guest workers a massive boost over Americans which will cause all sorts of issues. I think you'd have to take the "green card" approach and mandate that you can only hire guest workers where you can't get resident workers.

You never responded to him.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I didn't think it needed a response. He voiced his opinion and didn't ask for an engagement of thought. As I said, I'm interested in the opinions and reasoning of others on this. Dd weighed in with his thoughts... why the reluctance on your part?

[Lurker]

I had the same concern he did. Eliminating the minimum wage for guest workers creates an incentive to hire guest workers over American workers. How would you address that? Would you only eliminate the minimum wage for limited and specific job types?

[Embar Angylwrath]

Good question.

I dont think that elimination of the minimum wage for guest workers would deprive Americans of many jobs (some, like maybe in the IT sector, but not most). Most illegals work in non-skilled labor positions. And lets frame the debate a bit. Most illegals aren't from Australia, Ireland, Spain. They are from Mexico and South America. They work as pickers, wash cars, clean rooms, landscape...mostly manual labor. These are jobs that Americans avoid, unless they are forced into them by starvation. We have too much pride, or we're too lazy, to do these jobs (as evidenced by jobs going unfilled when illegals are expunged via ICE raids, despite advertising for the jobs... as long as Americans can sit on thier asses and collect an unemployment check equal to minimum wage wages...why work?)

So no... I dont think eliminating minium wage for guest workers would materially effect the wage status for the vast majority of American workers. In our eonomy, communication is key, both electronic and verbal. Most of the illegals we have working now in the US can't communicate in either. Promoting them to guest worker status wouldn't change that