With the clock ticking on the life of a voluntary online system that helps employers make sure they are hiring legal workers, a House panel today heard from lawmakers, business owners and experts on what to do next. ...
Rep. Ken Calvert, who authored the first program to check on the legal status of workers, the Basic Pilot Program, told the House subcommittee on Social Security that the current program should be made mandatory. ...
But after he testified before his colleagues, Calvert said that he doesn't expect any significant immigration bill to pass this year. What is likely, he said, is that Congress will pass a temporary extension of the current system.
Today's hearing before a Ways and Means subcommittee and another session before the Education and Labor Committee are viewed by immigration-watchers as part of an effort by Democratic leaders to show they are taking steps to address immigration. More hearings are expected before the Memorial Day recess on different aspects of the immigration issue."Legislating in an election year, especially on immigration-related matters, is more like Kabuki theater than serious policy deliberation,'' said Doug Rivlin, spokesman for the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant group.
Pages
▼
May 7, 2008
Kabuki Theater?
From the Orange County, California Register:
Look at thet poll after that article.
ReplyDeleteShould Congress require that all employers in the country use an online system to verify a person's eligibility to legally work in the United States?
Yes 70%
No 9%
Only if the government can guarantee the data base is accurate
22%
Elected representatives should do what the majority of the American public wants and stop pandering to special interests.
So wahat if SSA has to hire 700 people, bet it will be cheaper to hire 700 grade GS-6s or 7s than that bunch of ALJs that they are going to hire. Plus 700 GS-6s or 7s probably will do more work.
SSA is currently understaffed by tens of thousands of employees. A few hundred extra to do SSN verifications is a joke--that is not even one per field office. It would accomplish nothing. Same old story--try to do it on the cheap.
ReplyDelete