Wednesday, May 23, 2007

My plan for immigration

A reader to my other blog asked, “What’s your suggestion to control illegal immigration since you hate amnesty so much?” First to clarify, it’s not the amnesty I hate, it’s the violation of the law, and our politicians acceptance of it. Either it is a good law, and should be enforced, or it is a bad law and should be repealed. Providing amnesty to violators of the law every 21 years makes absolutely no sense.
As far as what I would do if I were to be able to determine immigration policy for a day?

1. I would require the government to tie the Social Security/IRS/DHS systems together so that when they get a single SSN is shown working at 37 different companies in a dozen states at the same time... they track it down and arrest the 36 people using purchased documents to work.
2. I would also require employers to utilize the Pilot system to verify the validity of Social Security numbers that workers provide to ensure they are valid. (This system is currently voluntary.)
3. I would increase the number of “undercover” agents that would go out and look for work, posing as illegals, and arrest/incarcerate those who knowingly and willingly hire them.
4 Companies found with unauthorized workers would be audited for compliance, and would be fined $100,000 per administrative “offense”. If it bankrupts the company, then they should have followed the procedures. If a company has a second offenses, the appropriate person/people (i.e. anyone who should have had knowledge of the practice) should be incarcerated.
5. All cities that currently have either written “sanctuary” ordinances, or implicitly provide “sanctuary” would have all federal funding removed. Additionally, the population of that city would no longer be counted towards any state per capita allocations. You don’t cooperate, we don’t fund. Look at Los Angeles right now, BEGGING for the feds assistance in combating their gang problems. Why? because their police can’t even ask people who they KNOW are gang members, illegally present what their status is, or alert the feds about them. (Note: Statistics say that 48% of gang members are illegal aliens)
6. Those convicted of transporting people into the country are felons, five years in a federal penitentiary.
7. You take away the jobs, you enforce the law, and you take away the motive for coming, and 75% will go home willingly.
8. I also WOULD require border enforcement, and I would also include a guest worker program. 9. The guest workers would not pay into social security, nor would they be eligible for benefits, however, a similar amount would be withheld from the employer and employee for payment into the administration and management of the guest worker program and into a worker healthcare program.
10. Guest workers would be pulled from world wide, not simply from our neighbors, and would be based upon the relative “poverty” rate of those countries. i.e. the poorest countries in the world would be permitted more “workers” than the middle and richer countries.
11. To obtain guest workers, you must PROVE that you have not been able to hire Americans at a standard pay rate for the area and for that job skill, and you would be required to pay the market average rate + health care benefits for the guest worker.
12. Guest workers would be eligible for up to two year contracts, and direct family members only (spouse/children) would be permitted entrance at the same time. Children born to guest workers in the US would NOT be awarded US citizenship.

Most importantly… in fact, we wouldn’t need any more laws on the books to do it….
I would ENFORCE the law!
It’s actually very similar to what the US Senate is proposing at this time, except that I would actually enforce the law, and I would not reward those who broke the law.

9 comments:

morgetron said...

Okay ... So what's your view on No Child Left Behind?

That's my passion right now. I'm praying for a change.

I like your plan. I have often said that if I were Supreme Ruler of the Universe, the world would be perfect!

fangers said...

NCLB? hehe... I've got my opinions but few facts to back them up.

I believe that NCLB is one of the best intentioned and worst planned pieces of legislation to have ever been passed.

What I do know about it are:

1. It is basically unconstitutional (10th amendment), however, most states have also abrograted their responsibility towards the public schools.
2. It gives significantly more weight to certain students than to others, e.g. how one person being absent on the wrong day of school can cause violations in multiple categories (low income, minority, non-english speaker, disabled, and general)
3. It does not fund anything (like we really need MORE funding...)
4. It does not address the issue of problems with teacher unions and bad teachers, it also does not provide any "benefits" to good teachers (also union related).
5. It promotes teaching "to the test" and not a good general education
6. It takes a significant amount of time out of the school year to perform the testing (significant means more than 1%)
7. It is impossible to acheive towards the end of the plan.

fangers said...

Also, in case you didn't see it, your mail server is blocking mine for "spam" (dang ISP), but you can find the link pages at:

http://corp.helium.com/About/linkhelium.aspx

just follow the instructions there to add the links to your blog.

morgetron said...

I would say you have a very good grasp of NCLB ... I only question your number 3 -- the parenthetical part ... What do you mean. I was wondering why you hadn't mailed me back. What can I do to unblock you?

PS: We're practically neighbors. I'm in Nebrasky.

morgetron said...

Oh yeah .. and also NCLB makes teacher feel helpless ... Don't forget that.

fangers said...

The number 3 is because the NCLB is basically an unfunded federal mandate, however....

I think if we were to run our schools efficiently, i.e. let teachers run it, not administrators, we would be much better off.

Here in Kansas, we just passed a huge increase in school funding, and what I note now is that one of our larger districts (Topeka) is now going to jump the District Supt salary from 150k/year to 200k/year, as the current supt has been there for about 3/4 years and is planning to leave.

I think we have way too much money spent on non-educational things, and not enough going to those budget items that actually do what the public schools are supposed to do... i.e. teach.

Telling my daughter (who is slender) that she has a BMI of 37 and is considered extremely obese is a crock, telling me that my son is deaf, though nice, and referring me to the SCHOOL DISTRICT hearing center for a detailed examination, is a waste.

I think schools should be in districts, but they should have a lot less administration, and local schools should have a lot more responsibility for their own quality.

fangers said...

Morge, here is the text of the message I'm getting from the rejection message:

SMTP error from remote server after RCPT command:
host mprdmxin2.myway.com[207.159.120.168]:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [74.208.4.194] blocked using dynablock.myway.com; Your message could not be delivered due to complaints we received regarding the IP address you're using or your ISP. See http://blackholes.myway.com/ Error: WS-02

morgetron said...

Hmmm ... My aunt gets that message some times too. I honestly have no clue. I'll email you another email address for future reference.

morgetron said...

And, Amen to #3. I feel like I'm lucky in the district where I teach. We have an efficient administration. I some times feel like I live in a bubble because I am really please as a teacher AND as a parent in my district. We are a B class district (not too big, not to small). We are ALL from the top down fed up with NCLB garbage though.

I was always irritated by the school physical exams as well, because I take my children to their own doctors, but I do realize that some kids may never get an exam if the school didn't do it. I just wish it was optional for kids who do make it to the doc when necessary.