A tipping point has finally been reached, apparently, on a national requirement that E-Verify be used by all employers to check the work eligibility of their new hires. A bill sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley), chairman of the subcommittee on immigration policy and enforcement, is set to begin moving toward passage this week. From an op-ed by the representatives in the LA Times:

The program quickly confirms 99.5% of work-eligible employees. Even though E-Verify is not mandatory, many employers willingly use the program. More than 250,000 American employers currently use it, and an average of 1,300 new businesses sign up each week.

Immigration: E-Verify helps employers weed out illegal hires – latimes.com

South Carolina moves a step closer to strengthening its immigration law with a vote by a House committee on Tuesday. From the Daily Comet:

South Carolina’s House Judiciary Committee voted 15-7 on Tuesday to advance a bill that would require law enforcement to check the status of people they suspect of being in the country illegally during a stop or arrest for something else. Opponents argued that the measure would worsen racial profiling and flies in the face of American freedoms.

SC legislators OK anti-illegal immigration bill | DailyComet.com

The measure was approved unanimously. The council all but agreed to the ordinance during a previous meeting, but held off on a vote over some technical concerns.

The law makes the use of E-Verify mandatory to get a Murrieta business license. It calls for code enforcement officers to check out any allegations of noncompliance.

MURRIETA: Council requires E-Verify for businesses | Local News | PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California

Georgia’s Security and Immigration Compliance Act requires that any company receiving a local, county or state public contract must first certify, under oath, that the business is enrolled in E-Verify. Failure to comply can result in the loss of the public contract and even criminal prosecution for false swearing.

When enrolling in and using E-Verify is so easy, why risk losing the public contract? We offer E-Verify with no setup fee and no monthly fee. We can activate your E-Verify account in just a couple of hours!

Do not wait another minute! Contact us or enroll today.

In the case of Bromell Manicured Lawns, which is under a $500,000 contract with GDOT for its mowing services, King said the company president, Michael Bromell, signed an affidavit dated June 16, 2010, that the company was using E-Verify as a condition of obtaining a work contract with GDOT. But King said, according to documents he obtained from U.S. Homeland Security, the company did not obtain an MOU with E-Verify until Aug. 26, 2010.

According to Georgia Senate Bill 447, passed this spring, "Contractors and subcontractors convicted for false statements based on a violation of this subsection shall be prohibited from bidding on or entering into any public contract for 12 months following such conviction."

The Marietta Daily Journal – Activist calls for probe into GDOT E Verify affidavit

“The system can falsely report a legal worker as being ineligible.”

This claim isn’t necessarily true, but even if it is, it doesn’t prevent a legal worker from keeping his job. E-Verify can only be used to verify new hires; in other words, the worker already has the job. It is illegal and prohibited by the employer’s agreement with the Department of Homeland Security to use E-Verify to pre-screen employees.

As long as the identification info submitted is correct, US citizens are never reported as ineligible. Non-citizen workers can, for various reasons, incur a “Tentative Non-Confirmation” in the initial response. Proper procedure requires, however, that:

1. the employer check the information submitted for accuracy and resubmit if an error is found;
2. the new hire be notified in writing of the initial response;
3. the new hire be given the opportunity to contest, in writing, the non-confirmation;
4. the new hire be provided with instructions, provided by E-Verify and in writing, for clearing up the discrepancy;
5. the employee cannot be fired, suspended, have training withheld or work hours shortened as a result of the non-confirmation;
6. the new hire either contact the local SSA office in person or DHS by phone to correct any problems with the employee’s eligibility. In other words, the final determination is done by a living human being, not the system;
7. the E-Verify system be updated to reflect the corrected information. Final determination of the worker’s eligibility is reported through E-Verify rather than by the employee to the employer, to eliminate miscommunication.

Critics refuse to acknowledge that the system is slanted, at every step, to protect the legal worker and that the E-Verify system has never, when used correctly, denied a legal worker a job.

“The system doesn’t match the Social Security number to the employee and can’t stop identity theft.”

While there may have been some validity to this claim in the past, it is much less an issue today, if at all. First, a US citizen is always eligible to work, regardless of what Social Security number he or she uses. For the purposes of employment eligibility, there is no reason for a US citizen to present an incorrect number.

Eligible non-citizens have a SSA number that is tied to the immigrant’s SSA and/or DHS record, which includes its own number(s) and photograph. Mismatches between the Social Security number and the alien’s immigration ID are detected. For workers who present a Resident Alien card or other work eligibility document, the photo on the card is matched to the photo on record. If there is still a question regarding identity, the new hire is instructed to follow the same basic procedure as enumerated above.

While it may be possible for an illegal alien to use the Social Security number of an eligible worker, one of the pieces of identification presented by the new hire must have a photo. Employers are required to exercise due diligence to ensure that identification documents are not obviously forged, but that has always been expected of employers and is not indicative of a flaw in the E-Verify program.

Detractors of E-Verify, such as Councilman Doug Linkhart, point to studies that show the system can falsely report a legal worker as being ineligible. And because E-Verify can check only whether a new employee’s Social Security number belongs to a legal worker rather than to the person who submitted the number, it also does nothing to deter identity theft, opponents say.

E-Verify rule pleases some businesses, but some council members oppose it – Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal

During E-Verify’s most recent full fiscal year, which ended in September 2009, Arizona employers made more than 1.3 million new hires but ran just 730,000 E-Verify checks.

Most Arizona employers aren’t using E-Verify

Battles between rival drug gangs have made Ciudad Juarez, across the border from El Paso, Texas, one of the world’s deadliest cities. More than 800 people have been killed this year in the city of 1.3 million people.

Shootings kill 16 people in Mexican border city  | ajc.com

"We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act," Brewer said after signing the law. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation."

Ariz. governor signs immigration enforcement bill

Note: Cross posted from BobGriggs.com.

Permalink

Mansogo also said Jimmy Carter Boulevard, once full of Hispanic drivers and pedestrians in the early evening, now appears almost deserted after 7 p.m.

Claudia Aguilar, a manager at Huntington Village Apartment complex located just off the same street, said occupancy dropped by 10 percent in the past two or three months. People who gave a 30-day notice said 287(g) is the reason.

Hispanics flee law, job loss  | ajc.com

After discussions with other workers, Alvarez and Lozano learned they were being paid $10 an hour, as opposed to $18 an hour, which Alvarez said is the normal hourly rate. He said he soon found out there was a reason for the unreasonably low pay.

The Marietta Daily Journal – Report Illegals working on courthouse