This is topic Feds may soon check workers' IDs in forum Off Topic at LymeNet Flash.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flash.lymenet.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/4/5542

---

Posted by tequeslady (Member # 6832) on :
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060302/ts_usatoday/fedsmaysooncheckallworkersids&printer=1;_ylt=Ai_S04jXJe1ouJ0Z1T_JYXvfB2YD;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-

Compare this to what Bush said in his last address about illegal immigration. It sounded to me like he didn't want to do a thing about protecting our border, nor did he have much to say about curbing illegal immigration.

Now, we want to start checking people's Social Security cards against a national database? This is convenient considering the recent talks about a National ID card here and what the UK is doing, don't you think?

Something doesn't add up.

============================================

Feds may soon check all workers' IDs

Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY | March 3 2006

Congress is headed toward approving a plan that would require employers to check every worker's Social Security number or immigration work permit against a new federal computer database.

Critics see the move - aimed at stemming illegal immigration - as the beginning of a government information stockpile that could be used to track U.S. residents.

"We're getting closer and closer to a national ID card," says Tim Sparapani, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Lawmakers such as conservative House Judiciary Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and liberal Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., have signed on to the verification plan, which is included in some form in every immigration bill currently before Congress. The goal is to make sure everyone working in the USA is doing so legally.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, which handles immigration, begins drafting its version of the bill today. The House bill passed in December.

The bills would require that a pilot program now used by 5,000 employers to check the legal status of job applicants be made mandatory. President Bush's 2007 budget includes $135 million to start expanding the verification system nationwide.

Proponents say new tools are needed to curb illegal immigration. There are now an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the USA. "If we're going to have any means of controlling our borders, you have to have a tamper-proof Social Security card and verification at the time of employment," says Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif.

Rep. Ken Calvert (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., says "this is not a national ID system." But several bills authorize studies of "tamper proof" Social Security cards or their issuance. The cards would include some biometric data and would be harder to counterfeit.

During a debate in 1984, former representative Don Edwards, D-Calif., compared a proposed enhanced Social Security card to an "internal passport." Twelve years later, conservative GOP lobbyist Grover Norquist flooded Capitol Hill with activists wearing washable tattoos of an inventory bar code to show how a government clearinghouse could become a way to "track" Americans.

Both sides agree that Congress' willingness to consider such proposals represents a political shift. "They're talking about things that, if I had talked about, they would have burned my humble butt," says former GOP senator Alan Simpson, who helped write immigration laws passed in 1986 and 1996. He contends that Congress' past refusal to create a secure ID system to verify employment eligibility is a reason that neither law stemmed the flow of illegal immigrants.

Former Republican representative Bob Barr of Georgia, now on the ACLU's advisory board, agrees that attitudes have changed, but he doesn't think that is positive. "Far too many people have been swept into the post-9/11 system of fear that is the basis of all public policy these days," he says.
 

---

Posted by Softballmom (Member # 6235) on :
 
Don't know much about any motives behind it. I just say it's about time!

I live in a community that is being flooded with illegal immagrants due to agricultural job oppertunity. Our schools are becoming more overcrouded each year with children that our school system is unprepared to educate. Drivers on the road with no driver education, no license and no insurance. Our community health department and Social services lobbies are running over. Our government assistance numbers are becoming staggering.

Not to minchen the number of arrests being made for drug trafficing by illigals just down the road. Something has got to be done.

Not only that but some of our American rights are put behind the rights of the visitors. For example, State money goes to fund pre-k education for non-english speaking students. This is in our public school systems. While american citizens have to pay for pre-k education unless they qualify for Government assistance but even then they have to drive their kids to another district because pre-k for english speakers are only at two designated school.

This is just one example. Again I don't know a specific motive and given the situation in my community I really don't care. Something needs to be done.
 

---

Posted by tequeslady (Member # 6832) on :
 
Yes, 'something' needs to be done. I agree. But IMO, we need to be careful in choosing what that 'something' is.

If the government is SO concerned about the immigration issue, why do you think they have been and are letting them come across the border at record levels?

Why did Bush in his last speech make it quite clear that he didn't intend to stop it, or do ANYTHING for that matter? In fact, it sounded like he supported it.

Why now are we building detention facilities for illegal aliens, when we have done nothing to stem the tide?

Why is there a military operation called, ENDGAME, that supposedly, in the future, will roundup illegal aliens from all over the country?

http://www.ice.gov/graphics/dro/endgame.pdf


If we think the aliens themselves are the source of all our problems, why haven't/aren't we stemming the tide now? Why haven't/aren't we doing something about our border now?

This is where I like to consider history. Remember that Hitler burned down his own capitol building called the Reichstag, and blamed it on the Communists. People were scared. He had a solution. The people were willing to accept 'anything' to feel safe and secure. We all know what happened then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree

It just makes me wonder... We are so used to being free here in America, I wonder ...

If history repeated, would we notice, until it was too late?

[ 03. March 2006, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: tequeslady ]
 

---

Posted by Softballmom (Member # 6235) on :
 
Sorry tesque but your thinking is just a bit over the top for me.

Honestly I never remember a speech saying open the borders. I do know Bush wanted to give citizen rights to illegals who had jobs whith I did not agree with.

What you are saying here to me sounds like.

He's darned if he does and darned if he don't.

Maybe he just changed his mind and like I said before I really don't care about motive just

Get-EEEER-Done
 

---

Posted by Softballmom (Member # 6235) on :
 
Tesque,

I am going to be a bit nosey. you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

Did I read right in another post that you are a conservative Republican?

If so what issues do feel put you in that category.

I was puzzeled when you said that because I have been getting the oppisite vibe from your posts.

Like I said you don't have to answer i was just curious.
 

---

Posted by tequeslady (Member # 6832) on :
 
I used to be. Republican all the way. Heck, when I was a kid, my parents had me handing out flyers for Barry Goldwater. I even went to the Republican convention with them.

Back then, Republicans used to be quite different. The definitions of right/left, conservative/liberal have all been twisted and turned now. What WAS is no longer.

Being conservative used to mean you understood we had a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy, as you hear people saying all the times these days. I won't bore you by repeating it all here.

Here's what I posted in another thread:
-------------------
I am conservative too, lymedad. I can't exactly say you and I agree.

But, then again, the definition seems to have changed over the past several years. Conservative used to mean someone who believed in following the Constitution, a limited government, free enterprise, hard work... not handouts, a moral society, etc.

We knew that we had to be willing to fight to protect our freedom. We didn't particularly want Socialists or Communists in our schools, media, or government. We watched vigilantly, as we were warned to by the Founding Fathers, anyone who would try to overthrow our Constitution.

Yes, the definition seems to have changed these days.
---------------------------

I most definitely am not a liberal. Actually, these days, I don't see a dime's worth of difference between the 2 parties. They have different rhetoric, yes, but they DO much the same. Have you ever noticed how plans seem to be continued even when President's change? One may spout something different about abortion, but when it comes to the larger picture... where our country is going, it's much the same. It's like a tag team.

Conservative Republicans use to be for a limited Constitutional federal government. As you know, one of the primary things that the Constitution does is to outline those things that the federal government can be involved in... the rest of the things were to be left with the states and the people. So, conservatives used to believe in states rights.

They believed in a fiscally responsible federal government that basically, did not interfere in their daily lives. Republicans believed that it was not government's job to CREATE employment; rather, it was their job to not INTERFERE by creating unfair laws, so that individuals could prosper through their own actions.

So, it used to be that Republicans did not want anyone that increased the span and control of the federal government. That used to be something that was more of a Democrat thing.

So now, I don't know how I would categorize myself, besides someone that loves their country and is very concerned.

I will vote for an individual, not a party. I will vote for the individual that has demonstrated through action, or their voting history, not just rhetoric, as many of the qualities I mentioned above as I can find.

Okay.. your turn. I am taking it that you consider yourself a conservative and a Republican. What issues for yourself do you feel that put you in that category?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Softballmom:
Tesque,

I am going to be a bit nosey. you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

Did I read right in another post that you are a conservative Republican?

If so what issues do feel put you in that category.

I was puzzeled when you said that because I have been getting the oppisite vibe from your posts.

Like I said you don't have to answer i was just curious.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Softballmom:
Sorry tesque but your thinking is just a bit over the top for me.

Honestly I never remember a speech saying open the borders. I do know Bush wanted to give citizen rights to illegals who had jobs whith I did not agree with.

What you are saying here to me sounds like.

He's darned if he does and darned if he don't.

Maybe he just changed his mind and like I said before I really don't care about motive just

Get-EEEER-Done

---