May 21, 2007 1:28 PM PDT

Work bill would create new ID database

The U.S. Congress is poised to create a set of massive new government databases that all employers must use to investigate the immigration status of current and future employees or face stiff penalties.

The so-called Employment Eligibility Verification System would be established as part of a bill that senators began debating on Monday, a procedure that is likely to continue through June and would represent the most extensive rewrite of immigration and visa laws in a generation. Because anyone who fails a database check would be out of a job, the proposed database already has drawn comparisons with the "no-fly list" and is being criticized by civil libertarians and business groups.

All employers--at least 7 million, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce--would be required to verify identity documents provided by both existing employees and potential hires, the legislation says. The data, including Social Security numbers, would be provided to Homeland Security, on penalty of perjury, and the government databases would provide a work authorization confirmation within three business days.

There is no privacy requirement that the federal government delete the information after work authorization is given or denied. Employers would be required to keep all the documentation in paper or electronic form for seven years "and make it available for inspection by officers of the Department of Homeland Security" and the Department of Labor. It would also open up the IRS' databases of confidential taxpayer information to Homeland Security and its contractors.

Even parents who hire nannies might be covered. The language in the bill, called the Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act (PDF), defines an employer as "any person or entity hiring, recruiting, or referring an individual for employment in the United States" and does not appear to explicitly exempt individuals or small businesses. (Its Senate sponsors did not immediately respond on Monday to queries on this point.)

"All the problems that are attendant to the no-fly list are going to be a problem for a nationwide employment eligibility verification system."
--Timothy Sparapani, senior legislative counsel, ACLU

Backers of the proposal, including the Bush administration and many members of Congress, argue the changes to U.S. law are necessary to combat fraud and to ensure employees are truly eligible to work in the United States. According to an analysis by the Pew Hispanic Center, about 7.2 million undocumented immigrants were working in the United States as of March 2005.

"This bill brings us closer to an immigration system that enforces our laws and upholds the great American tradition of welcoming those who share our values and our love of freedom," President Bush said in his radio address on Saturday.

But the federal government's hardly stellar track record in keeping its databases accurate and secure is prompting an outcry over the verification system. Opponents argue that errors could unwittingly shut out millions of Americans who are actually eligible to work in the United States.

"All the problems that are attendant to the no-fly list are going to be a problem for a nationwide employment eligibility verification system," said Timothy Sparapani, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "And that's because the government as a rule is terrible about setting up massive data systems and then conditioning peoples' exercises of rights and privileges on the proper functioning of these databases."

Supporters of a federal verification requirement argue that some states, including North Carolina, Georgia, Colorado, Idaho and Arizona, already require employers to engage in some sort of verification--but Sparapani says they're far less extensive and intrusive.

One well-known example of buggy federal databases can be found in the no-fly list, which is intended to keep known terrorists off commercial airplanes. But it's flagged many other people, including Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), for questioning at security checkpoints.

In 1996, Congress enacted a related law colloquially known as the "deadbeat dad database," that required employers to report new hires to the federal government. But unlike the current proposal, the new-hire database did not have the ability to deny employment authorization.

CONTINUED: Headaches likely for employers…
Page 1 | 2 | 3

See more CNET content tagged:
legislative counsel, employer, homeland security, bill, database

150 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Its about time
If every employer had to verify their applicants legal citizenship, jobs for illegal workers would decline significantly and immigration would decline. In my opinion such a system is overdue, and unlike the no-fly list which just uses a name this system just checks to see if the birth date, social security number and name match. There is no chance for mistaken identity like the no-fly list. But of course there still will be issues and errors. I feel the pros out way the cons.

Mark
Posted by Striker77s (55 comments )
Reply Link Flag
We already have a system in place
that can verify a person with personal info, a SSN, and past work history. Employers are just too lazy to use it, or either don't care. A database already exists for citizenship verification, it is part of the social security administration. National ID Cards to verify citizenship also exist, they are called Social Security Cards.

This article has nothing to do with technology, and only exists to shove the ultra-left-wing opinions on the bill being voted on in congress down the throats of the CNet readers. Like I said the database already exists, the law for verification already exists, the ID cards already exist, just that the law is not really enforced that much and employers are too lazy to use the existing system.

The scary part of this whole article is that the bill has not even been approved of yet! It is still being debated on, and voted on. It only passed one house of congress, and the article is pretending like it has become the law already, when in fact it has not yet become law and might, for all we know, be voted down or filibustered.

In fact, we don't even need it to be passed, just enforce the existing laws on immigration and use the existing database to verify citizenship. Then enforce the law to penalize employers for hiring illegals and once you crack down on them, they will beginning using that verification database like they should have over 70 years ago when it was established by FDR as part of social security.
Posted by Orion Blastar (590 comments )
Link Flag
But No Need For A New National Work Database, Right?
I agree with you, but why would a new database for all Americans be necessary. There are already ways to check people out thoroughly in place.
Posted by dornbear (21 comments )
Link Flag
Political news pretending to be tech news?
CNet? What is the deal here? I want to read about technical news? Not political news!

Since when did CNet become an ultra-left wing political tabloid rag?

I mean CNet has been forcing global warming down our throats for the past year or so, and now is forcing illegal immigration issues down our throats as well now. How much money is the Democratic Party paying your company to publish articles supporting their point of view in order to brainwash us technology people who want to read technology news instead of political news?
Posted by Orion Blastar (590 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Sure, it's political!
Just don't select the tabs that relate to government if you don't want to see politics.

Anyway, liberal is to conservative as libertarian is to authoritarian. You're just confused as the ACLU has been subverted to a liberal agenda.

Both parties want Big Brother. They just want to shut out the others from access to it. Watch another election season unfold where the issues will yet again be Gay Marriage and Abortion.

Both parties are entirely convinced that loyalty is way more important than issues. Both are pushing an "Either you're with us or you're against us" strategy.

The slobs that rule plebeian society are going to bleat and recite the mantra "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear." and you know what? They're right!

Nobody IS going to do anything about anything. Reporting the disintegration of our civil liberties won't do ANYthing to stem the tide. Anyone who stands out to fight it will just get hurt.

Thank you ACLU for putting pedophiles, illegal aliens and aggressive homosexual stalking way ahead of the right to privacy, the right to demonstrate and the right to bear arms.

Stalin would love them but then again, Stalin wasn't a libertarian. He was a Communist dictator.

And just remember, a vote for an independent is a vote for the bad guys. Support your local Demacrook or Republicon and... maybe they'll let you keep your job. ;) Maybe.
Posted by JadedGreg (33 comments )
Link Flag
Tech and politics news
First, if you don't like one of our articles, nobody's forcing you to read it. I don't read every article News.com publishes (though I do read most).

Second, we've been covering the intersection of technology and politics for over a decade. Anyone remember the CDA back in the mid-1990s? CALEA? Encryption export controls? All those are political, and technical.

Third, the questions of security, privacy, accountability, access, and reliability for a new government databases are assuredly technology-related and deserve to be asked in these pages.
Posted by declan00 (848 comments )
Link Flag
Police state, here we are
You cant turn around now or fart in peace without the government wanting to check if you are a legal citizen.

Read this, a weep, my fellow countrymen, for what we have lost in our ruch for "security"; we have lost our national soul:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2063979,00.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2063979,00.html</a>
Posted by joespr (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
It has been happening for years
While I agree with your lament, we have chosen to give up our individual liberties and freedoms along time ago. I've even seen citizens applaud and advocate the loss of freedoms. We have had police check points for decades(your papers please). Unwarranted searches are now legal and have cost the lives of many law abiding citizens and law enforcement officers. Gun laws have become an excuse to murder our own citizens. (Ruby Ridge, Waco..ect.) In many places one cannot express a thought contrary to current political correctness without being accused of hate speech and can be punished by law. Our own smokers are treated with less respect than illegals. People choosing to practice their faith now have to worry abut where they are for fear of a lawsuit and punishment. Your worried abut a database? Where have you been? <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.polyconomics.com/searchbase/09-16-99.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.polyconomics.com/searchbase/09-16-99.html</a> has a wonderful correspondence that explains what happened. Because the above loss of freedoms didn't directly effect many of us, we just allowed the loss of freedoms for our fellow countrymen. Now it is effecting you and there is no one left to stand for us. And your worried about a database?
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
I AGREE
WHEN DO STOP BEING SO AFRAID? THE GOV. SAYS THE BOOGYMAN IS HERE, AND ALL WE CAN DO IS LET BIG BOTHER(GOV) SHIELD US! WE HAVE BECOME A BUNCH OF P$SS%S. BOTTOM LINE DO NOT HIRE THOSE PEOPLE!!!!! HOW CAN WE LIVE FREE WHEN WE HAVE TO SHOW AN ID TO EVERYONE AND THIER MOTHER!!!!!!
Posted by SCVBA_STEVE (4 comments )
Link Flag
Papers Please
This is a disgrace if it passes. Welcome to Nazi America.
Posted by PzkwVIb (462 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Its happening today.
Police can and do set up random check points any given time and stop a law abiding citizen and demand "your papers please". If your papers are a little out of order then the citizen is subject to an unwarranted search and possible seizure. The crime? Driving to the checkpoint. Haven's seen anyone whine about that one. The fact is, employers are one of the 2 primary causes for illegal immigration. They hire illegals for cheaper wages and can cheat on employment laws because they know illegals are less likely to be whistle-blowers. We need to stop this. You got a better idea?
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
Send Illegals Home First
The FIRST step is to deport all illegal immigrants NOW. Use buses, planes, trains, whatever. Round them up, ship 'em back home, and make the wait 10 years before they can apply for legal entry and/or citizenship. THEN you can play with databases.
Posted by Xenu7-214951314497503184010868 (153 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Dependency
Well sure you could send back all 10 million or so illegals, spread across the entire States, at a cost of billions to tax payers. Then you get to pay more for the services and goods from the industries that depend on those illegal workers.

Still interested? This register will be independent of the presence or non-presence of illegals anyway.

UPDATE SERFS SET CAN_WORK = 'N' WHERE PARTY_AFFILIATION = 'D';
Posted by JadedGamer (207 comments )
Link Flag
You have to have
a database to decide who to "round up" first.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
WHY DEPORT?
IT WILL COST US, THE TAXPAYER TO SHIP THEM BACK!! IF WE AS AMERICANS DO NOT HIRE THESE PEOPLE, THERE IS NO REASON TO STAY THESE PEOPLE USE THE SERVICES AND WE LET THEM, STOP HANDING OUT THE FREEBIES AND START TAKING CARE OF OUR OWN FIRST, THEN MAYBE TRICKLE DOWN HELP!! I KNOW QUITE A FEW PEOPLE FROM MY HOME STATE OF PENNA, THAT COULD REALLY USE THE MONEY THAT IT WOULD COST TO SEND THEM BACK WHERE THEY CAME FROM, LET THEM WALK!!!
Posted by SCVBA_STEVE (4 comments )
Link Flag
No way....
If they came here illegally to start with, deport them the first time, and don't EVER allow them back in. If they sneak across the border again, SHOOT THEM!!! Land of the free doesn't mean free to come in and wage economic terrorism on the legal population....which is exactly what the illegal aliens are doing. SHOOT THEM!!!
Posted by dragonfly8610 (49 comments )
Link Flag
This doesnt have a DAMN THING to do with "Illegal-aliens"...
This is simply the... painfully-obvious... next-step towards the intentional creation of a totalitarian police-state within the United States. This is, in fact, been long-expected (by anyone that has actually been following the carefully-choreographed destruction of every one of our "civil liberties"). That is what "REAL-ID" is all about. That is what "mandatory data-retention" is all about. This is what "data-mining" is all about.

None of this has anything to do with safety... and everything to do with control.

Just wait... "laws" giving "law-enforcement" the absolute, unilateral, power to detain... seize... investigate... monitor... search... question... or, go on any damned &gt;&gt;&gt;fishing-expedition&lt;&lt;&lt; that they want... and, even "torture"... have all, pretty-much, already been put in place.

Use the Internet... youll be continually "monitored" by the Government. Have a "bank account"... youll be continually "monitored" by the Government. Have a car... youll be continually "monitored" by the Government. Have a job... youll be continually "monitored" by the Government.

ALL of this has a name... an UGLY ONE (to any real-American)... "TOTALITARIANISM".

I, for one, am sick of constant government video-surveillance... warrant-less Government "spying programs"... Police "checkpoints"... "secret" police-actions... and so-called "war", after "war", after "war" (which are entirely artificially-created, solely, to rob me of every single American-freedom)... And, all of it coming from some of the most corrupt-administrations in American-history.

Frankly, there are only two kinds of people that support this CRAP... FOOLS, and TRAITORS that just know that "freedom" is the single-greatest threat to the STATUS QUO (which they personally benefit from).
Posted by Had_to_be_said (384 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I agree
Well said, however, what does one do about the illegal hiring of illegal aliens. Punishing the employers is a step in the right direction. Shouldn't we have a list that states "Don't allow this green card number, we know it has been sold." Or "This SS# is no good, it has been stolen." Without a database, this is not possible. What is the solution?
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
Good Comment
I couldn't have said it any better.
Blame Rockefeller,Ford, and Morgans for starting this mess in America.
These guys are traitors to the constitution and the elected leaders who are allowing this are co-conspirators and traitors also.
Our children are doomed if it is not stopped.
I think it is too late for Britain.
Posted by BattleAce7101 (51 comments )
Link Flag
I couldn't have said it better myself
You are right on the money. I urge everyone reading this article to make your misgivings known to your congressmen and senators, then vote accordingly every chance you get. This nonsense has *GOT* to be stopped.

I am truly afraid for my country...
Posted by T38 (30 comments )
Link Flag
WHERE ARE THE STATE GOV.????
AREN'T STATES SUPPOSE TO POLICE WHAT HAPPENS IN THIER OWN STATE, OR ARE THEY MERELY PUPPETS FOR BIG GOV.
Posted by SCVBA_STEVE (4 comments )
Link Flag
H-1B dependent Indian companies dont even consider US citizens for US jobs
U.S. Citizens are never even considered for most jobs that are filled with h-1b candidates. U.S. citizens are being discriminated against, massively, in the hiring of jobs based in the U.S.

Read on, and you'll learn the reason why.

Instead, Indian IT offshoring companies are using this Visa to preferentially hire only Indian nationals, and then train them on the job in the U.S. As a prelude to massive offshoring of U.S. jobs.

Karmal Nath (Indian Commerce Minister) knows this, and he is raising a fuss over it because he wants to obscure the fundamental reasons why there is a controversy over this Visa program.

These issues are:

- Indian companies discriminate against U.S. citizens by preferentially hiring Indian citizens, over U.S. citizens, for U.S. based jobs.
- The h-1b Visa program is being used as the "Outsourcing Visa" by Indian IT offshoring companies.

The commerce minister himself has coined the term "Outsourcing Visa" when referring the U.S. h-1b visa program.

These companies are not even trying to find U.S. personnel to fill these jobs.

In open testimony before congress, an applicant called a U.S. recruiter for a job in the U.S. She was told she would not be considered for the job simply because she could not be sponsored for an h-1b Visa.

In other words your are not qualified just because you are american. That's discrimination and bigotry in its worst form.

India has to ask itself one very consciencious question, would this be allowed in India? I think not.

Karmal Nath is responding perversly (he is threatening the U.S. with trade sanctions in the WTO) because he knows there is something obviously wrong. And the Senators (Durbin and Grassely) are merely working to make sure that U.S. citizens are not discriminated against in their own country just because their point of origin happens to be the U.S.

It is ridiculous to link the h-1b Visa with trade. It is a long-term, 3 to 6 year visa, meant to enhance U.S. industry and U.S. jobs, and possibly lead to U.S. citizen ship.
Posted by Jake Leone (143 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Wrong solution
I want to see the problem illegals kicked out, the ones with the DUIs, hit and runs, assault, etc. Also, those depending on different types of welfare.

No more babies that are citizens because they are born here, they are citizens of the country of their mother.

The illegals that are no problem, are no problem. No need to chase them out.

Are the apologists going to try to claim that all 12 Million are active criminals or welfare leaches?
Posted by Phillep_H (497 comments )
Link Flag
Exactly Right Its The "Outsourcing Visa" And Amerticans Are Being Sold Out
I agree. We are being sold out by our own government.

The very hard to swallow part is that it takes so much time, money, and hard work on the part of an American to prepare for these specific careers. It took me six years of working and going to school to get my BSCS. And it wasn't easy - I remember late nights in the data center, working with other students to solve problems and get projects in on time. It is an intense and competitive program - all to prepare you for a career that is being offshored and streamlined by the H-1Bs.

How utterly unfair and disheartening to set Americans up for failure like that.

This will be happening with all the high skill service sector jobs. Discussions are being held now. The limitation (without any government controls) will be set only the imaginations of the corporations trying to increase their profits. This is why nothing will get better until we cut the corporate strings attached to all our politicians.
Posted by dornbear (21 comments )
Link Flag
Is There A Trade War Looming Ahead!
While this article has not been read in its entirety, some questions that must be asked are these: The United States like most other developed countries by and large depend on international trade; and, from what was read in an earlier post--one particular country whose nationals are the recipients of H-IB Visas is reported to be threatening trade sanctions if the U.S. based hiring companies do not get their way. So, one wonders what would be the trade and other policies of foreign owned companies operating in the United States and what would be the re-actions in countries like the China, countries that make up the European Union, Venezuela and other oil-rich countries that conduct international trade with the United States? Already, the EU has proposed hefty fines on the US based Microsoft Corporation for not sharing its IP with competitors, What happens if some of these countries do not purchase US made energy equipment, aircrafts, military hardware et cetera et cetera in retaliation to the proposed new U. S. Immigration Laws in the context of the earlier post that was referred to!
Posted by Commander_Spock (3123 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Trade War in Hollywood only
All the U.S. is particularly interested in is observance of trade law and reasonable measures to avoid an imbalance in trade.

As far as intellectual property is concerned, it's the obligation of any corporation doing business in foreign countries to understand and observe their laws. Our government does not try to change them, nor are they interested in Socialist idealism from countries who feel that they have a mandate to get more from us than we get from them.

It just so happens that a bunch of post cold war has-beens still think that we can buy friends. Everything else is plain old hardball negotiation between businesses which favor larger corporations while dragging governments into the business of business.

I suggest that Government only regulate trade according to Constitutional guidelines and allow the Fed to do their jobs. Leave the political Napoleons out of it and learn to take care of your own house.

Getting back on topic, this idea is entirely in agreement with a zero compromise strategy towards illegal aliens. Politicians aren't there to serve the interests of Mexicans who they're just convinced will become voters for their holy party anyway. The Dems think they're a shoe-in on Minority-Victim Socialism and the Pubs think they've got a lock on the Catholic.

The rest of us know what a worthless government is in Mexico. I personally don't give a hoot how hard they work. They're not welcome here until they are willing to play by our cultural and economic rules. That includes not selling yourself to the church, the state and the corporations.

Predictable troglodytes, one and all.
Posted by JadedGreg (33 comments )
Link Flag
Not worried
about a trade war. The fact is, foreign nations need our energy equipment, military hardware and most importantly, our food. We feed the world. In other words, they need us more than we need them. Further, as far as the oil goes, I'd bet we have more cappped wells than any other nation in the world. If we need to, we could double our production.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
waste of time and money!
I do not think this will help in any way! It seems to me that whoever wrote this bill thinks that the main problem faced by the US companies is that they are unable to determine if their employees or job seekers are legal in the US or not. In fact the opposite is true! Otherwise, there would not be such a big disparity in wages paid to illigals and to locals.

In short, it is a half measure (at best!) that deals with the symptoms not the cause of the problem.
Posted by Serg_1 (19 comments )
Reply Link Flag
They know
U.S. companies purposefully hire illegals. This is just a way to ensure that they can determine and be held accountable. As far as the cause, the employers want cheap labor and the employees are coming from a place that hires for even less. No big mystery.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
Internal and External Security!
What will be the motivation of other countries nationals to fight alongside the United States in the face of the proposed new immigration policies already the United States has seen countries like "France" in particular (although a member of the NATO Pact) not agreeing to be be in alliance with the United states in its present conflict with IRAQ . The whole issue/question of "***" for "tat" at the Governmental level (you do this and we will do that). Also, countries giving preference to non-US companies doing business in a foreign country--Brazil, Nigeria, India, Sudan....
Posted by Commander_Spock (3123 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Our Children Will Weep
For all the rights and privileges this administration has wrenched from us.

Parts of the proposed immigration bill I could support. But this little piece of legislation will steal so much more of our privacy rights from us, I will vigorously oppose it.

Another term like this one will spark a revolution.
Posted by RubySnow1 (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
This administration?
This is hardly an Administration bill, the Democrats support it almost 100%. The only ones who don't are the more conservative Republicans.
Posted by donpro (7 comments )
Link Flag
Where were you
when our fellow countrymen were decrying loss of freedoms and liberties decades ago. It has nothing to do with this administration, rather, complacency of the citizenry. Off the top of my head I can think of how the average citizen thinks that it is O.K. to have the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 14th, 15th and 24th amendments to our constitution disregarded. Your worried about a database for legal workers? I suppose you think we should also disregard our immigration laws also and then wonder why you have no protection of you personal freedoms and liberties.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
For the record
Leave this administration out of it as anything other than accomplices. Big Brother was around long ago. They're just tired of spending so much money on keeping it secret.

You've only got one choice left. Some day in the not so distant future, some people are going to forcibly prevent aliens from coming into the country and Uncle Sam will send troops to subjugate it's own citizens.

Some mamby-pamby family men are going to get all wrapped up in a debate over who fires the first shot and some people will know better.
Posted by JadedGreg (33 comments )
Link Flag
Bill is wrong solution - Secure Border First
The bill relies on some fallacies:
1: An ID can be created that can not be forged.
2: The Government can accurately collect and warehouse data.
3: The Government can determine which illegal was here by the deadline and the ones that came afterwards.
4: The Government will enforce the new law.
5: The fiscal impact of this bill is low.

Let's look at the issues with the bill:
1. Any ID can be forged. We live in an age that you can get anything if you have the money.
2. The Government can not even find the illegals using the same SSN or dead people's SSN in the country now. The no-fly list shows how poorly the Government collects, scrubs and maintains data.
3. If you have this zVisa to "prove" it, see #1.
4. The Government does not enforce the laws we have already, so what would make us think they would enforce a new law?
5. Estimates are around $1.5 trillion to add the guest workers to our entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare and Welfare.

The border needs to be closed first. Once we have control on the border, then we can look at solving the issues at hand. The fence bill was passed prior to the 2006 election, 2 miles have been built, the rest needs to be completed. Then we need to work with the Border Patrol to maintain complete control of the border.

The next issue is the Government needs to address is to enforce the existing laws. Fine the businesses that hire illegals. Deport all criminal illegals. Look at the social security number usage, and review the people that have numbers used in multiple places across the country, deport the illegals that are abusing the system.

The next issue is to resolve the "Anchor Baby" issue by stating that children of citizens born in the US are automatically citizens. Existing anchor babies can not be used as an anchor for illegals, they must be deported with their parents and they can use the legal process to get into this country.

The next issue is to reduce the time it takes for legal naturalization. 8 years is too long, why can't it be done in a few months?

This Bill is the wrong solution, and one of the main sponsors is John McCain. Conservatives can see clearly why we can't for for McCain now.
Posted by cjmnews (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I disagree
making it harder to work here or less appealing would make it easier to close the border.

If people knew it was hard or impossible to get jobs then the incentive to come would be reduced.
Posted by volterwd (466 comments )
Link Flag
ID database
If the ACLU is against it, it must be a good idea.
Posted by kakodes_too (20 comments )
Reply Link Flag
This proposed law is worse than useless.
1. It won't do a damn thing to stop the illegals.
2. It will screw up the system even worse for those of us who play by the rules.
3. It will provide a whole new set of criminalized behaviors to give the the executive branch an excuse to exercise force against the citizens of this country, i.e. you and me.
4. It will raise taxes.
5. It will divert tax money into the pockets of the cronies of the government representatives supporting this bill. The rich get richer and we end up paying the friggin bill, assuming we can get the job.
6. The more databases the government creates to "manage" people, the more screwed up the data becomes, and the less capable they are of cleaning ANY of them up.
7. For what it's worth, I've yet to hear of an I.T. worker (or any other white collar worker for that matter) losing his or her job to an illegal immigrant. You just don't see a lot of ******** wearing 3-piece suits to work; although that might not necessarily hold true of snowbacks.

I use the terms ******* and snowback in their traditional meanings to describe illegal aliens who come across the Mexican or Canadian borders. You don't like the terms, too bad; they are both accurate and appropriately derogatory.
Posted by Dr_Zinj (727 comments )
Reply Link Flag
So how do we
stop the hiring of illegals? You are correct in that the U.S. has problems managing data, but don't we need a database of some sort so employers can know who to hire and who not to? How else can one tell? P.S. point #7 isn't relevant.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
I.D for potential Hires
This is sooooo stupid! I worked for several year for my husband's company and part of my job was to confirm eligibility for employment, whether as an actual employee or as a sub-contractor. We had, and he still has, a very specific government form that need info from designated forms of I.D. plus the employee's signature and mine verifying that I had seen the I.D. For good measure we made copies of I.D. submitted and attched them to the form. NO ONE got a paycheck, and were warned that they wouldn't, unless this form was in compliance and on file. Sometimes it was a pain because of expired drivers' licenses, birth certificates that had to be sent for, etc. But the rules were the rules. Why do we need another law and layer of bureaucracy? Stooooopid!
Posted by BoulderSue (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
This is why
we need a database. All that information went to some office only to be filed away. In other words, useless. No one verified the veracity of the I.D. that you saw. It could have been forged or stolen. You don't know and neither does the next person that would hire these people.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
ID Database - insanity
Can you imagine the errors? Duplicate names, problems with middle initials, prefix and suffix, women who marry or divorce and acquire new names. It's incomprehensible.
Posted by sjobbins (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
So how do
employers know who to hire and who not to?
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
LOSING OUR FREDOMS
HAS IT OCCURED TO ANYONE THAT OUR FREEDOMS ARE SLOWLY DISAPPEARING! YOU NEED AN ID FOR EVERYTHING THESE DAYS! I AM PETTY SOON YOU WILL NEED TO SHOW ID TO SEND A LETTER!?! WHAT THE @#$%, WHEN ARE WE GOING TO SAY ENOUGHS ENOUGH? THERE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO BE BAD PEOPLE OUT THERE, ITS A FACT OF LIFE!!! BUT DO WE NEED TO GIVE UP OUR FREEDOMS? JUST SO A FEW CAN EAT, AND THE GOVERMENT CAN TRACK THEM, AND US IN THE PROCESS? WHERE DO I SIGN UP TO HAVE A TATOO ON MY FOREHEAD?
Posted by SCVBA_STEVE (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Enough was enough
long ago I'm afraid. So how do you propose that we decide who should be employed and who not? No, we don't need an extra number/I.D. We need a database to determine what SS# and what green card# has been stolen or forged. Then we can tell the lawless bastards to go get screwed and find a job/handout somewhere else. How else would we do this?
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
SSN: 666 - 66 -6666 ?Mark of the Beast?
When I read the [i]Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007[/i] I found,[i] ?And that no man might work, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. - Revelations 13:17, Version 2007.05.18"[/i] stealthily interleaved into it.

This specialized Nation ID Database Legislation is another bureaucratic government solution in search of a problem. I do not understand why the U.S. Congress wants to create any more massive new government databases then those they already have created, and why the government is so obsessed about trying to manage, quantify, track and control people who are ambitious, hard working self-starters who want to work for a living.

First, there was the [i]"No-Fly List"[/i] to protect us from the air traveling [i]"Bad Guys".[/i] Now [i]Uncle Sam[/i] and his [i]Big Brother,[/i] in their wisdom, want to create a [i]"No-Work List"[/i] to protect us from the hard working [i]"Bad Guys".[/i]

I, as a free market capitalist-employer, should have the business freedom to make my own [i]Hiring Decision[/i] from the list of employee candidates who show up at my H.R. Office ready and anxious to work, and not be restricted to using some list that [i]Uncle Sam[/i] and his [i]Big Brother[/i] has "blessed." JP B-)
Posted by Catgic (106 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Absolutely!
Nuff said! I'm sure you won't complain because Uncle Sam has the right to put you in jail for paying wages to illegal aliens without declaring their wages and paying taxes.

Oh. Should I be calling them "undocumented immigrants"? I'm such a bigot! Thank god we have HR departments! :o)
Posted by JadedGreg (33 comments )
Link Flag
Are you objecting
to the database or the lack of freedom to hire illegals. It seems, from your comments that you are objecting to the freedom. Sir, if you want to employ those people, move there, you will find them in abundance. Or, pay a livable wage to the citizenry of this nation. They and their fathers fought and died for your freedom. The least you could do is play by the rules that granted your liberties. God and country first. It doesn't work any other way.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
Further,
as to the no-fly list, have we had anything resembling 9/11 since? No? Then it has done its job.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
Your use
of the Word is an abomination. The Word also says to obey the laws of the land. "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law." It is against the law NOW, to employ illegal aliens. You should be able to decide who to hire. Anybody who is LEGALLY here. If you can't make it without the lower wages, then you probably shouldn't be in business to begin with.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
One Additional Question About Proposed "Work" Bill...
... if some of these same jobs (that be offered to American Citizens and other Permanent Residents) are being outsourced faster than one can blink to countries like China, India, Brazil... then where will the news jobs come from in addition to the Governments of China, India, Brazil... placing "restrictions" on the visas of the American Commercial Pilots, Doctors, English Instructors, Professional Engineers... required to be in the services of the emerging "affluent" Chinese, Indian, Brazilian.... nationals and their countries' economies!
Posted by Commander_Spock (3123 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I don't mean to
appear to harangue you but you have posted some of the few intelligent comments/questions relevant to the article. You are correct in knowing that there would be even more off shoring. The American people will not tolerate it for long. They will demand that if U.S. companies wish to enjoy the freedoms that they have, then they will have employ American workers HERE!! As I pointed out. We can be self-sufficient. Pain? Yes, but in the long run we would be much better off.
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
Just amazing.....
I was born and raised in the US. Now my government is going to make me verify I was born here and have the right to work here. All because they didn't have the wherewithal to secure our borders and deport illegal aliens years ago.

And the scariest part is...if the illegal alien that is using my SSN to work here beats me to the punch, I may very well be the "illegal" being deported, or at the very least, being blacklisted and unable to get a job.

And all from a "conservative" government that has spent more money to cozy up to Big Oil than it has to make life better for our citizens.

Thanks, Bush, you piece of ****.
Posted by dragonfly8610 (49 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Bush had nothing
to do with it. This was a bill proposed by congress that has the support of the democratic side of the house. Do you have a better way to stop employers from hiring illegals? I'm listening. How do you determine who is suppose to be here and who is not without a database? Can you answer this or are you just another whining piece of ****?
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
This is great!!
The more of this Orwellian stuff there is, the closer we are to the next American Revolution.

If you can't fix it, blow it up and start over again.
Posted by alflanagan (115 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Crazy - Why Wouldn't Traditional Paperwork And Background Checks Work.
Why wouldn't traditional paperwork and background checks work?

Employers have been doing that for years, what is the problem?

Why create a new system, a new monster, that makes things more complicated, and could infringe on the rights of Americans?
Posted by dornbear (21 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Because,
obviously, it doesn't work. There is no register that an employer can check to see if someone is legally here or not. The db would remove the automatic response one gets from employer's that get caught employing illegals. "We didn't know."
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
Important To Combine The Two - Technical & Political
Its good that you do combine both technology and politics and that the discussion comes up, because information technology changes the way we do things, and can change things very quickly. the ramifications are important to consider.

Take the H-1B foreign visa issue, for example... not enough people know both sides of the issue

- how it is being used accelerate the offshoring of IT,

- how it has in the past depressed and flattened wages in the IT industry,

- how it has caused thousands of American IT workers to be laid off (there is no way to get an accurate count because the labor deaprtment does not track information closely by job type),

- AND scariest of all, the lessons learned from this "experiment" will make it even easier and faster to offshore multitudes of high skill service sector jobs in the future...

- after hearing about how easy it is to create a program to swing votes in the elections, recently, and that no one would no unless they could read the source code - it is a secure decision to offshore all our IT? What about accounting? My tax return, apparently is accessible in India now..... I don't know the whole story in that one, but its not a good feeling. We know about big companies and cutting costs and how safeguards are not always so safe. (woops, sorry to get off topic a little, but it proves my point)
Posted by dornbear (21 comments )
Reply Link Flag
UNBELIEVABLE
NOT THAT THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION WOULD ATTEMPT TO BRING THIS KIND OF LAW IN, BUT THAT ANY AMERICAN WOULD THINK IT A GOOD IDEA, IT IS NO WONDER THAT THE WORLD THINKS WE ARE RIGHT OUT THERE. MY WIFE WAS SHOCKED, I AM SHOCKED, ANYONE THAT I HAVE TOLD IS SHOCKED, WHERE ARE WE GOING, MY GOD MAN, HOW MUCH OF A TOTALITARIAN STATE DO WE WANT, OR IS IT TOO DEEP FOR ANYONE THAT AGREES WITH THIS LAW. AND THE ONLY JOKE ABOUT THIS IS THAT WITHOUT THE MEXICANS TOO HARVEST THE FOOD CROPS, THIS COUNTRY WOULD SHUT DOWN WITHIN WEEKS, WITH THE FOOD ROTTING IN THE FIELDS. HOPEFULLY COOLER SMARTER MINDS WILL PREVAIL, AND AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE YOU'LL BE HARD PRESSED TO FIND SOMEONE THAT WILL ADMIT THEY VOTED FOR BUSH. GOD HELP US !
Posted by moshia (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
The bill was introduced
by Senator majority leader Reid. Now you Bush bashers are even blaming him for something the Dems thought of. <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/L32ImmigrationLB032806.pdf" target="_newWindow">http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/L32ImmigrationLB032806.pdf</a>
Try clicking on the link. I'm not sure how you do it in your part of the country but here in Kansas, we don't use Mexicans to harvest. We have a golly-gee-whiz machine called a combine. I'm pretty sure we won't starve. Without the illegals, we'd have to hire (gasp) legal workers. Oh, no, heaven forbid!!
Posted by suyts (824 comments )
Link Flag
New OT branch on Constitutional Rights.
Let's keep this branch short!

In response to various posts that were at the end of their tree:

1. The Constitution is about many things but for the most part it can be considered a document that defines and limits the authority of the Federal government. Reference all the passages which state that all rights not explicitly granted to the Federal government are retained by either the States or the people.

2. The Constitution is not a static document. It can be modified and parts can be and have been repealed.

3. The Constitution can only be amended by a super majority vote in Congress. The Supreme Court is given the responsibility to interpret the law and is very much prejudiced in favor of legal precedents.

4. The Bill of Rights is about individual rights, yes. They don't protect aliens but we have signed contracts with other countries which obligate us to treat their citizens according to law. Those who enter the country illegally may or may not have certain protections. I'm no expert on such laws. Perhaps someone can provide clarification there.

With these points in mind, many portions of the Constitution need to meet the needs of the moment. The country is entitled to draft people into military service but they are very limited in respect to what they can do regarding private property.

In times of war, a lot of the Constitution is resoundingly trashed and it's to the shame of the country that they allow such things to happen. None the less, the needs of survival to protect our way of life often require compromise. I will respect such compromise if it is done publicly and with popular approval and is only done with a provision that such acts will be reviewed regularly and offered as a ballot initiative for repeal by straight popular vote, no super majority.

It's to the shame of the people that they let such things happen such as draft deferment for college students and other people of privilege. It's unfair to target very young people as draftees while older people who profit from a war economy let the children of their neighbors die.

I can think of a zillion other issues but I'm afraid that I'm going to be a hypocrite and say that it's not my battle. I can't trust my fellow citizens to do anything more than vote with their wallets so my only point today is that civil rights ALL matter or none of them matter.

Technology is part of our world. Our first citizens wrote the Constitution long before modern technology so it is up to us to be ready to make whatever changes need to be made to preserve the intent of the Constitution.

With that in mind, I have no problem with C/Net offering a forum for debate in a community that has a high percentage of technically inclined people as long as they do not censor anyone who has reasonably informed opinions and who respects the opinions of others. Even technically ignorant people should be welcome but they can't expect to use rhetorical issues to monopolize the discussion.

With that in mind, I am perfectly willing to challenge C/Net authority if I see prejudicial censorship but the earlier accusations that C/Net was violating anyones rights just don't hold water for me. If C/Net attempts to censor one person for a slight infraction while allowing highly abusive behavior from another, I'll make it personal and to heck with their rules.


If it is important to anyone to be completely confrontational towards C/Net, I will not act to shut them down but I have no obligation to defend "free speech". Just accept it if you perceive them to be prejudiced and don't use them as a source for presenting your own political views.

Finally, many times I'll make an obviously unsupported accusation such as claiming that all politicians are crooks. Those comments are opinions and I'll accept such comments from anyone as long as they aren't rude about shutting down anyone else based on opinion.

If anyone wants to post information and have it accepted as FACT, they should always post some sort of credible link that supports their claim. Linking to bloggers who are not recognized professionals doesn't count.

This isn't anything new. Any mainstream forum has rules to this effect. It's perfectly within the rights of the publishing authors to ignore anyone, particularly if they seem to be hecklers so if you want a dialog, don't start off the conversation with unsupported accusations.

Perhaps C/Net can clarify their policies on Libel but otherwise, I think we should stick to the topic at hand and only diverge on civil rights if it's pertinent to the topic.
Posted by JadedGreg (33 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.