GovernmentExecutive.com

A federal law barring employers from hiring illegal workers is rarely enforced, government witnesses told a Senate Judiciary subcommittee Monday, as senators vowed not to repeat the mistakes of lax enforcement as they craft new immigration legislation.

An insufficient workplace-enforcement system could be the "Achilles heel" of any effort to overhaul immigration laws, said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., during the hearing.

Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee Chairman John Cornyn, R-Texas, said the Senate did not focus enough on the workforce provisions when it debated and passed a massive immigration bill last month.

"Not a single amendment was debated or voted on during the Judiciary Committee markup, and less than an hour of Senate floor time was devoted to the issue," he said, noting that the Homeland Security Department has said that some aspects of the bill are unworkable.

Cornyn and Kyl had pushed the Senate to adopt an immigration measure that focused more on border security than the one the chamber passed. The immigration bills are now in limbo, as procedural hurdles have delayed the start of a conference on the House and Senate versions.

Enforcement efforts at the former Immigration and Naturalization Service and the new Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in the Homeland Security Department have declined in recent years, according to a Government Accountability Office report released at the hearing.

In 1999, 417 employers received notices of intent to fine for hiring illegal workers, but by 2004 that figure dropped to three. Worksite arrests declined from 2,849 in 1999 to 445 in 2003, the report found.

GAO concluded that workplace enforcement was a "low priority" for the INS and ICE. In 1999, INS had 240 full-time employees working on workplace enforcement, but in 2003 there were only 90 comparable agents, GAO said.

According to the GAO report, INS and ICE have found that widespread document fraud has made it difficult to enforce the law. Under current law, employers must attest that documents presented to them appear genuine, making it difficult to prove that an employer has knowingly hired an illegal worker who presented faked documents.

Both House and Senate immigration bills would require employers to use a government database to verify the legal status of their workers. The Senate bill would only require them to check new employees, while the House version requires verification of all employees.

Kyl insisted that the new law also should include a new kind of identification card that includes biometric identification so that employers could be certain that a person applying for work is who they say they are. "You cannot rely on the same type of document and expect to get different results," he said.

But such cards would be expensive. Martin Gerry, the deputy commissioner for disability and income security programs at the Social Security Administration, told the panel that a card with enhanced security features would cost significantly more than previously estimated.

Last year, the SSA said such cards would cost $25 each, and that re-issuing new cards would cost $9.5 billion. Since then, the cost has gone up due to "new requirements for additional verification of evidence," Gerry said.

The electronic verification system included in both House and Senate bills might encounter problems, GAO predicted. It is based on the existing voluntary "Basic Pilot" program in which about 4,300 employers participate.

That program does not help combat fraud, might result in delays and might need more resources if it were to become mandatory. "Current ... staff may not be able to complete timely secondary verifications if the number of employers using the program significantly increased," according to the report.

COMMENTS

• As a Legacy INS special agent I often wondered how to better enforce the law. One of the major factors that no one has pointed out is that many legacy INS enforcement offices were supervised by SACs or their equivalent who had risen through the ranks as benefit officers. It is really hard to establish an enforcement mission when all you know is the "give away program." Unfortunately, it hasn't gotten any better since the merger. Benefits still has a substantial amount of pull when it comes to enforcement. CIS holds the records, which they charge a fee to handle. We can't get informants into the country without their approval, which they charge for. We can't get informants’ work authorization with out their approval, which they charge for. Many legacy enforcement personnel saw ways to improve enforcement, some established alien processing programs far better than Enforce, and far less expensive. Others attacked the employer sanctions issues with programs like Vanguard. Any initiative died a very quick political death. I commend legacy Customs for promoting from within. At least 99 percent of their managers have extensive law enforcement back grounds and knew what laws they were enforcing. Now they get stuck with trying to understand and develop plans of attack for a law that no one understands, and one that is at the whim of each and every politician. My view: Fine ever employer a minimum of $10,000 for employing one to 10 illegal immigrants, and $100,000 for any number other than that for first offenses. Criminal prosecution and permanent debarment for the industry after that. ICE Special Agent Posted June 29, 2006 7:17 PM
• Why do people and the media continue to frame this debate as illegal "immigration?" These people are in no way immigrating -- they are trespassing, plain and simple. They are criminals and should be identified as such. GovExec.com reader Posted June 27, 2006 7:06 AM
• I served more than twenty-six years as a law enforcement officer in the U.S. Border Patrol and the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). From 1983 until 1990, I masterminded the development and implementation of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system. SAVE is still one of the most successful verification programs ever developed at the INS. Along with promoting the SAVE Program, I adamantly advocated a mandatory Social Security Number Verification System for all employees and severe penalties for non-compliant employers. I was ridiculed, punitively transferred and told over and over again the country did not have the "political will" for such a system. Now Social Security number verification is part of both the House and the Senate version of pending immigration reform legislation. In my book "Fixing the Insanity-America's Immigration Crisis" I outline four major initiatives that must be undertaken immediately, before we grant a single immigration benefit to any illegal alien: (1) Secure our borders using ground radar systems, sensors, fences, cameras and other technology. (2) Erect large "tent city" detention camps to house all aliens caught entering the United States illegally. (Minimum detention should be for 90-120 days). (3) Implement a mandatory Social Security number verification system and require all employers to verify the Social Security number of every employee. This system could be available in six months if properly funded. (4) Create a "compliance division" within DHS/ICE. Non-compliant employers who fail to use the verification system and continue to employ illegal aliens must be heavily fined using a simplified "summons" process. These are the immediate solutions. Neville W. Cramer Posted June 23, 2006 1:35 AM