Monday, September 12, 2011

Grand America Caught in DHS Audit

The Grand America Hotel is an excellent example of the need for Everify and the protection it can afford both businesses AND employees

Utah Law requires all businesses, with over 15 Employees, to use Everify and both federal and state law prohibit the hiring of “unauthorized aliens.” Regrettably, no penalties were attached for noncompliance in Utah, but its use might have provided some escape from punishment if it had been used.  

According to the SL Tribune article, the five-star Salt Lake hotel in a DHS audit showed that the hotel could NOT “provide legal documentation to work in the United States.“ 

The Deseret News report stated “DHS determined that some hotel employees did not have valid documentation to work in the United States even though they had presented facially valid documents when they were hired.” 

No further explanation was given, but it is well known the the State of Utah issued Driver's License to illegal aliens for several years before changing “Driver Privilege Cards."   Both documents might be considered "facially valid documents" as they are official Utah Photo "identification" cards, which are not supposed to be used for identification. 

Apparently, the Hotel may have been using the I-9 form which requires NO verification by the employer when hiring.  The Tribune article reports that "The documentation of all new hires is checked against federal databases under the E-Verify system."  The Grand America Hotel was not found on UFIRE's  DHS provided Utah E-Verify users databases
through June 2011.  The use of E-Verify in Utah was mandated beginning July 2010

A later database showed they finally signed up for E-Verify in July around the time of a controversial protest over "the Grand America Hotel’s attack on immigrants."

According to this article "The Grand America Hotel bosses set a July 6 deadline for all of the employees. The bosses require that all workers reapply and either show the necessary documentation or face immediate termination. However, the bosses extended this deadline one month, to Aug. 6 in order to ensure staffing at the Governors’ Conference."

Utah Valley University Revolutionary Students Union said, “Defending workers, especially those who are immigrants is a top priority. Grand America is attacking the right to receive a living wage and enforcing racist systems of verification. An attack on one worker is an attack on all of us.”

After the DHS audit, a total of over 100 undocumented employees lost their jobs because of lack of  proof of legal status.  Nothing has been reporting concerning replacements, but as of the end of July there were 41,290 unemployed people in Salt Lake County. 

Although the Hotel association reported a $12 wage for the hotel jobs, Workforces Services has several listed a $8.25/hr.
Grand America Hotel is a GOLD member of the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce which was the primary proponent of the Utah Guest Worker Permit (HB 116) which attempts to “legalize the illegal” or in their words

Saturday, July 09, 2011

Advocacy Journalism for illegal aliens

Anyone following the Utah media should recognize the bias toward illegal aliens, guest workers, HB116, etc.   Here's a more subtle one in the SL Trib, you may have missed, which reported "Utah’s independent voters are cooling to the state’s tea party movement, with support dropping by more than half over the last several months, according to a newly released (BYU) poll."

Reporting on a few answers, the article failed to report the main points of the 25 questions in the April Utah Voter Poll by BYU's Center for the Study of Election and Democracy:  
  • 62%  disapprove of how the Utah State Legislature is handling its job
  • only 12% believe "illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay permanently in the U.S."
  • 17% wanted illegal aliens "to go home immediately"
  • 40% allowed 'most' to stay as temporary workers.

  • 58
    % support the AZ enforcement bill
  • 79% supported Sandstrom's HB 497 enforcement bill

  • 63% supported HB 469 (sponsoring immigrants)

  • 45% "did not know" the LDS church's stand on any of the 'immigration' bills

  • 84% wanted the GRAMA bill repealed

  • respondents were 39% GOP, 13% Dem and 42% "independent"

  • 61% conservative, 24% liberal

  • 96% had attended college

  • Huntsman and Romney got the most favorable rating at 63%

  • The current Congressmen form Utah were all about 50%

But the Trib decided the important item was the Tea Party. The response actually was 48% of voters thought favorably of the tea party. 

Wednesday, July 06, 2011

Can Employer be Held Responsible for Illegal Alien Crime?

It appears that an employer CAN be held liable for the crime of an Illegal Alien Employee. 

Here is a case
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (AP) - The family of slain Huntsville police officer Daniel Howard Golden was awarded $37.5 million in punitive damages Tuesday by a Huntsville jury.
Golden's family had sued his convicted killer, Benito Ocampo Albarran along with the El Jalisco Mexican restaurant where Albarran worked. The jury awarded the Golden family $25 million from Albarran and $12.5 million from the restaurant.

Golden was killed in 2005 after answering a domestic dispute call at the restaurant in Northwest Huntsville. According to evidence and testimony from Albarran's murder trial, he shot Golden twice in the head, killing him. Court records indicate Albarran was intoxicated at the time of the shooting. He was sentenced to death for the crime in 2008.
Click here for an extensive paper on the subject:
Excerpt: "The amended RICO definitions added a violation of section 274 of the INA.codified in 8 U.S.C. § the list of prohibited conduct qualifying as a predicate offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1961. Under the expanded definitions, .racketeering activity. for purposes of a civil RICO suit includes .any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to bringing in and harboring certain aliens). This section bears the title Bringing in and harboring certain aliens. and appears targeted at people that smuggle or conceal aliens in the United States.  In contrast, section 274A is entitled Unlawful employment of aliens and qualifies several prohibitions on employment of illegal aliens in the United States. The amendments opened the door for the use of federal racketeering law against companies that knowingly violate the INA.   Although relatively obscure, the amended definitions did not go unnoticed for long."

Any lawyers out there who want to take up the cause in Utah?

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Mandatory Everify for Nation??

I have wondered why the US Chamber of Commerce supports HR 2164 "Legal Workforce Act" which would mandate the use of Everify nationally over a period of time. 

 Kris Kobach   has reservations about the bill based on the ideas that the federal government would not actually enforce it, if passed, and states have the enforcement right as noted in the recent Supreme Court case
Kobach: "The goal of the state laws is to encourage illegal aliens to self-deport. If Washington gets a clue and joins the states in this strategy of attrition through enforcement, so much the better. But the ideal enforcement environment is one in which both the states and the feds are on the field."  
"The states are actually enforcing these laws, in sharp contrast to the federal government’s lax enforcement approach under President Obama."
These comments (below) from Phyllis Schlafly add a little more grist to the mill.   Her proposed amendment, re tax deductions for wages , is an excellent idea. 
The comment on restricting states to mandatory use of everify only to government employees
was not readily found in HR2164, unless it's this proposal  (which it doesn't seem to say): -
"(2) PREEMPTION- The provisions of this section preempt any State or local law, ordinance, policy, or rule, including any criminal or civil fine or penalty structure, insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to the hiring, continued employment, or status verification for employment eligibility purposes, of unauthorized aliens. A State, locality, municipality, or political subdivision may exercise its authority over business licensing and similar laws as a penalty for failure to use the verification system described in subsection (d) to verify eployment eligibility when and as required under subsection (b)."
On the subject of  forbidding the states the right to punish, here is the proposed change to current law (read the highlighted text, the italicized words were added for clarification) :
Proposed: `(3) GOOD FAITH DEFENSE-
`(A) DEFENSE- An employer (or person or entity that hires, employs, recruits or refers for fee, or is otherwise obligated to comply with this section) who establishes that it has complied in good faith with [Everify] the requirements of subsection (b)--
`(i) shall not be liable to a job applicant, an employee, the Federal Government, or a State or local government, under Federal, State, or local criminal or civil law for any employment-related action taken with respect to a job applicant or employee in good-faith reliance on information provided through the system established under subsection (d); and
`(ii) has established compliance with [hiring legal employees] its obligations under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) and subsection (b) absent a showing by the Secretary of Homeland Security, by clear and convincing evidence, that the employer had knowledge that an employee is an unauthorized alien.

Compared to the current law:  ORIGINAL : "(3) Defense   A person or entity that establishes that it has complied in good faith with the requirements of subsection (b) of this section with respect to the hiring, recruiting, or referral for employment of an alien in the United States has established an affirmative defense that the person or entity has not violated paragraph (1)(A) with respect to such hiring, recruiting, or referral."

Phyllis Schlafly   "Lamar Smith's E-Verify Bill Must Be Amended"
E-Verify, a computer process that makes it fast and easy for employers to check the validity of employees' Social Security numbers to ascertain if they are legal, was created by Congress as a voluntary system. It demonstrates its utility by verifying individuals within a few seconds with 99.5 percent accuracy, but only about 2 percent of businesses actually use it. Arizona passed the Legal Arizona Workers Act in 2007 to require the use of E-Verify by businesses in that state and to allow the state to revoke the business license of any companies that knowingly employed illegal aliens.
On May 26, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a five-to-three decision (Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting), upheld the Arizona law. The Court rejected the pro-amnesty claque's argument that immigration enforcement is exclusively the federal government's responsibility. . . .
The pro-amnesty U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which was the loser in the Arizona case, conspired with House Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, to introduce H.R. 2164, which unless amended, will reverse Arizona's significant victory. This bill sounds helpful because it pretends to make E-Verify mandatory nationwide, but it actually ties the hands of the states.
H.R. 2164 pre-empts the states from requiring use of E-Verify unless employees work for state or local governments. That's equivalent to giving amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who are currently employed in our country.
H.R. 2164 forbids the states from using their constitutional power to revoke licenses from businesses that hire illegal aliens unless there has been "a showing by the Secretary of Homeland Security, by clear and convincing evidence, that the employer had knowledge that an employee is an unauthorized alien." There is no likelihood that an Obama administration will prosecute employers who use E-Verify but fail to fire the
illegals, or who contract out part of their workforce to circumvent the system.

The arguments for Lamar Smith's H.R. 2164 are fallacious. We are told that only the federal government can do anything about the immigration issue, but the recent Supreme Court decision provides the definitive rebuttal to that. We're told we need a nationwide congressional law because states like California and New York will never pass an Arizona-style law.
Now that states have the go-ahead from the Supreme Court to implement mandatory E-Verify and voluntary attrition is taking place, there's a better chance that many more states will imitate Arizona than that the Obama administration will ever enforce E-Verify.

Since Arizona's law went into effect, 80,000 illegal aliens have already left that state, and Georgia has seen a similar exodus. Their voluntary departure is without cost to the taxpayers.

An additional way to get employers to obey the law against employing illegal aliens would be to amend H.R. 2164 with Rep. Steve King's, R-Iowa, proposal to make E-Verify a condition for the employer to take a tax deduction for wages paid, a provision already adopted by Alabama. That would put the incentive on the employer where it belongs, and we would not need prosecutions or deportations.

Saturday, June 25, 2011

Solving the Utah Illegal Alien Problem

A few items concerning the situation with the Guest Worker program in Utah and a better way to SOLVE the illegal alien problem 

First:  The Arizona 2007 Everify Law which was recently affirmed by the Supreme Court, provided many of the items needed to aid in the current illegal alien problem by making it more difficult to ignore hiring laws:
  • It required ALL employers to use Everify
  • It provided for penalties of suspension, 'probation,' and then possible loss of a business license.
  • It allowed citizen complaint with substantial proof of illegal employment to be filed, investigated and, if valid, rectified - with appropriate punishment.
  • It indemnified an employer from punishment if Everify had approved the unauthorized alien.
Second: In Utah, there is an initiative being proposed at the county or local level based on this decision and the AZ law underway (so far introduced in three counties) to mandate Everify for all employers.

Third:  Everify has a very high positive success rate in matching and authorizing employees.  Everify can currently only be used for newly HIRED employees, legislation has been proposed to expand it to all employees.

Fourth:  Utah law prohibits the hiring of unauthorized aliens, as does federal law.  Utah requires ALL public entities to use Everify.   Utah requires ALL businesses with more than 15 employees to use Everify.

Fifth:  Utah has not complied vary well with either law.  

Sixth:  I totally agree it is a sad day when we must use force to comply with laws.  Regrettably, there ARE employers that use, and abuse, the system to gain unfair advantage by putting cost burden on the taxpayers that may otherwise be paid for by obedient businesses.  Some may not believe this but many love the "cheap labor" illegal alien as a profit making ploy.   The Salt Lake Chamber is THE biggest proponent of the Utah Guest Worker program

Seventh:  There has been a debate over the term "amnesty" in connection with the Utah Guest Worker Permit.  For those that are offended by the term, because the illegal alien would be required to pay a fine, I would point out that the fine is far less than the cost to come to the US legally.  For those politically sensitive to the term, you may call it simple SALE of Utah residency, to the lowest common denominator.

It should also be mentioned that any employer of current illegal alien who would hire the same person as a "Guest Worker" would receive NO penalty or punishment (AMNESTY) under HB 116 for his non compliance with Utah law.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Response to HB 116 Email Support

Concerning legalization of illegal aliens in Utah, the sophistry continues unabated  In fact HB116 IS yet another step in the continuing process of legalizing, accepting and promoting (in the state of Utah) the illegal alien, undocumented alien or unauthorized alien (whatever one would like to call them).   The process was begun by the Salt Lake Chamber, the Sutherland Institute and various religious and other pro- illegal pseudo-compassionate organizations and various government entities.

The process has included failure, or reluctance enforce Utah (and federal law) issuing Utah Drivers' Licenses and later Driver Privilege Cards, awarding Instate Tuition, virtually ignoring Official English law, accepting and promoting of certain 'heritages' (over others) and  massive propaganda campaigns through local media in support of illegal immigrants. 
  ***Further Rebuttal comments below ***
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:37 PM, xxx (State delegate) ; wrote:  I received this e-mail earlier today. 
Dear Fellow Republicans,
America’s federal immigration system is broken. ***Mainly due to failed enforcement *** This failed federal system has resulted in millions of people being in the US illegally. In spite of this federal dereliction of duty, the federal government mandates that Utah taxpayers PAY FOR the health care, education, and other services required, BY FEDERAL LAW, to be provided to illegal aliens. ***some by courts, some be law, some by Utah law ***This is the largest unfunded federal mandate in the history of our country. ***Making undocumented legal workers in Utah will NOT reduce the costs of educating illegal alien children, it merely institutionalizes the payment for children of 'guest workers' ***

HB 116 stops the defacto amnesty that exists today for illegals as a result of our federal government’s abject, dismal, pathetic failure to address the issue of illegal immigration. ***changing status from undocumented to 'guest' is amnesty or, if preferred, sale of Utah residency *** HB 116 doesn’t regulate immigration, but instead addresses the impacts of over 100,000 people already in Utah illegally. ***and continues or exacerbates the problems for Utah taxpayers and Utah unemployed *** HB 116 provides strong enforcement by assessing a fine up to 10 times the maximum federal penalty (USC 1325) and requires criminal background checks and fingerprinting to enter a database, a practical mechanism to enforce immigration law. ***But only if the illegal choose to 'come out of the shadows *** HB 116 eliminates taxpayer subsidies by requiring illegals to pay for their own health care, pay taxes and obtain insurance. ***and receive amnesty for previous crimes for which they have never been prosecuted (ID theft, employment, etc. *** HB 116 fights crime by funding the prosecution of violent and dangerous criminals. ***Theoretically already being done ***HB 116 penalizes businesses with a “three strikes” law that will revoke an employer’s business or professional license for up to a year. ***unless they are using 'uverify' ***

Below you will find a copy of the Repeal HB 116 and Replace resolution with a line by line rebuttal. Whether you like HB 116 or not, the whereas statements in this resolution don't tell the truth regarding HB 116.
HB 116 is constitutional and does comply with the Republican Party platform. If you wish to see for yourself the actual content of the bill and bill highlights, you may link to it at the web site


Bob Babcock
State Delegate, Precinct 4212

Uphold the Constitution of the United States and Republican Immigration Platforms: Repeal HB116 and Replace

WHEREAS, HB116 violates the Constitution of the United States, which:
HB 116 doesn’t violate the letter or the spirit of the Constitution based on immigration matters, but rather, HB 116 allows Utah to assert its 10th Amendment Constitutional rights. The only way HB 116 might be considered unconstitutional is if Article 1, Section 8 and the 10th amendment are considered subservient to federal supremacy and federal pre-emption.  ***There are mixed legal opinion on this issue ***

Delegates powers over immigration to the United States Congress;

The US Constitution delegates “naturalization” and “invasion” to the Federal Government. ***Surely this does not mean that “invasion'” is a function of the federal government ***HB 116 doesn’t attempt to regulate either, but instead regulates illegals who are already here. HB 116 only addresses the impacts of illegals that were ALREADY domiciled in Utah prior to May 10, 2011, that by federal law Utah is not allowed to deport and the federal government refuses to deport. ***However, if federal and state laws were enforced, e.g. everify use – no jobs = self deportation ***

Results in a breach of federal immigration law;

HB 116 won't become effective until July 2013 to allow Utah time to apply for a federal waiver. If the waiver is granted, HB 116 will unequivocally not be a breach of federal immigration law. ***And if the waiver is NOT granted??? ***

WHEREAS, HB116 violates the Utah State Republican Party Immigration Platform, which states:

HB 116 complies with the Utah Republican Platform.

We believe that control of our borders is an urgent national security interest and our national sovereignty depends on those secure borders;

HB 116 has nothing to do with control of our borders. HB 116 deals with the impacts of over 100,000 illegals already here in Utah. Only those with established domicile in Utah prior to May 10, 2011 are eligible.

We oppose illegal immigration and all forms of amnesty, or legal status, for illegal immigrants;

HB 116 has nothing to do with amnesty or legal status for illegal immigrants. ***Would not a Guest Worker Permit change legal status? ***USC 1325) for trespassing into our country. ***and still be illegal in the United States if no waiver is given ***

We believe that the current laws against employing illegal immigrants should be vigorously enforced;

HB 116 vigorously enforces the law by creating a database for those already here illegally. Without a criminal background checks and a database, illegals remain in the shadows, unaccountable for their actions. ***If they have only committed the crime, but have not been arrested, they will be awarded amnesty for an crime committed *** Only by knowing who is here illegally can current laws be vigorously enforced. ***If they have a “criminal” background, would they even apply? ***

WHEREAS, HB116 violates the National Republican Party Immigration Platform, which includes:

***”Immigration policy is a national security issue, for which we have one test: Does it serve the national interest?" Does HB 116 serve the national interest? No, it serves a narrow self-interest within the state of Utah.***
HB 116 complies with the National Republican Party Platform.

Border security is essential to national security;

HB 116 has nothing to do with control of our borders. HB 116 deals with the impacts of over 100,000 people in Utah illegally. Only those with established domicile in Utah prior to May 10, 2011 are eligible.
Enforcement of existing laws;
***Judging from past 'enforcement' of HB 81, HB 251 et al, any enforcement against undocumented workers and/or their employers will be minimal. ***

***HB 116 also gives amnesty for employers who have hired illegal aliens ***
HB 116 vigorously enforces the law by creating a database for illegal immigrants. Without criminal background checks and a database, illegals remain in the shadows, unaccountable for their actions. Only by knowing who is here illegally can current laws be vigorously enforced.***Laws can, and should be, vigorously enforced AGAINST illegal aliens even without a database. ***
Enforcement of the law against those who overstay their visas;

HB 116 vigorously enforces the law by creating a database for illegal immigrants. Without criminal background checks and a database, illegals remain in the shadows, unaccountable for their actions. Only by knowing who is here illegally can current laws be vigorously enforced.***Laws can, and should be, vigorously enforced AGAINST illegal aliens even without a database. How does granted them permission to work in Utah (their probable reason for overstay) penalize them?***
Real consequences, including denial of federal funds, for self-described sanctuary cities, which stand in open defiance of federal and state statutes that prohibit sanctuary policies;

HB 116 inherently prohibits sanctuary cities as it provides law enforcement the tools necessary to prosecute crimes. HB 116 vigorously enforces the law by creating a database for illegal immigrants. Without criminal background checks and a database, illegals remain in the shadows, unaccountable for their actions. Only by knowing who is here illegally can current laws be vigorously enforced.***Any city currently giving sanctuary status (not enforcing existing laws) is given amnesty by HB 116 ***
Prohibition of driver's licenses for illegal aliens and affirmative action through in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens;

HB 116 does not provide a drivers license. HB116 does not provide in-state tuition rates for those here illegally. HB 116 does modify an existing “driving privilege” card to make it more difficult to obtain.
***Utah already IS one of the few states who provide official driving privileges. It, therefore HAS a fairly extensive list of the 'shadow' illegal and does nothing about that status. ***
Opposition to government policies that encourage or reward illegal activity;

HB 116 does not encourage or reward illegal activity. HB 116 contains some of the strongest provisions in the country regarding enforcement of existing laws. HB 116 eliminates taxpayer subsidies for health care, education and other services. HB 116 leads the nation in the fight against crime including identity theft. HB 116 prosecutes non-compliant businesses. Taken as a whole, HB116 is a strong deterrent to illegals coming to or staying in Utah if they have committed any crimes.
***HB 116 absolutely encourages illegals as have many of our current policies. With a Guest Worker family permit an expanded number of illegals (now GW Family) could come to Utah. ***

Expresses concern that some Republican legislators voted for HB116 and that our Republican Governor signed the act, insomuch as it clearly violates State and National Republican Party Platforms and faces serious Constitutional challenges;

Urges all Utah State Republican Legislators and the Governor to repeal HB116; and ensure that any immigration legislation is fully constitutional and adheres to the principles of the Republican Party Platform.


The Utah Republican Party Chair shall deliver printed copies of this Resolution to all state legislators,Governor Herbert, Lt. Governor Bell and Attorney General Shurtleff within 10 days.

***Vote for REPEAL of HB 116 ***

Friday, June 10, 2011

New LDS Statement on Immigration

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has issued a new statement on immigration,  apparently replacing, or supplanting, a previous statement.  
With a vote on repealing Utah's proposed Guest Worker Program coming shortly at the State Republican Convention, the timing is interesting.

Each and every church, of course, has a right to express and opinion, as do individuals.  It is also appropriate for everyone to make their own decision based on their principles, beliefs, understanding and knowledge.

This statement can be construed in many ways, especially for those opposing a Utah Guest Worker program.

While the statement, "the federal government of the United States should secure its borders and sharply reduce or eliminate the flow of undocumented immigrants. Unchecked and unregulated, such a flow may destabilize society and ultimately become unsustainable."  will find few in disagreement, others may be more 'controversial.'

As in the Utah Compact, the statement declares:  "As those on all sides of the immigration debate in the United States have noted, this issue is one that must ultimately be resolved by the federal government."    
Again, another noncontroversial statement,  other statements seem more subject to interpretation:

For example,   "The history of mass expulsion or mistreatment of individuals or families is cause for concern especially where race, culture, or religion are involved.  This should give pause to any policy that contemplates targeting any one group, particularly if that group comes mostly from one heritage."

Personally, I have seen nothing in the policies and stance in the movement to eliminate the Utah Guest worker Program that targets any group - unless that group is 'undocumented immigrants.'   I know of very few that are targeting "one heritage."  I know of far fewer (none) in favor of "mass expulsion or mistreatment of individuals or families."  

If a particular heritage is the predominant portion of 'undocumented immigrants,' perhaps the question needs to be asked "why?"   Further, why should one "heritage" be exempt from obeying the law?  (If that is what is being suggested.)

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is concerned that any state legislation that only contains enforcement provisions is likely to fall short of the high moral standard of treating each other as children of God." 

I believe I can treat everyone as a child of God and still expect them to abide by laws and live by a standard of respect for those laws and I suspect most people can do the same.

The package of Utah's recently passed 'comprehensive' laws did contain other proposal in addition to enforcement (HB 497) by attempting alleviate some of the problems with current immigration laws with HB 466 an HB 469.   A summary of the bills can be found here.

"The Church supports an approach where undocumented immigrants are allowed to square themselves with the law and continue to work without this necessarily leading to citizenship."

I can support this idea and my understanding is that there are legal ways for illegal aliens to do so; go through the proper procedures to obtain a visa.  It is possible to return to their home country and complete the process.  It may take time, but most good things do - and it will be worth the effort.  Remaining in one's homeland is another principle that the church has long taught.

From a companion statement, we are admonished to be less judgmental.   As a convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I agree that most people may need to be less judgmental and I am satisfied that the Church reiterated the idea that "Bishops are in the best position to make appropriate judgments as to Church privileges."

I hope and trust that most Church leaders and members will give due consideration to the completeness and entirety of the restored Gospel in making these decisions.

Monday, May 30, 2011

Supreme Court Affirms Everify Use

Use of another tool in the ongoing battle against illegal aliens has been confirmed.

In a 5-3 decision the US Supreme Court has affirmed the mandatory sue of Everify and allowing licensing penalties.  

"Arizona’s licensing law falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the States and therefore is not expressly preempted."

"The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) makes it “unlawful for a person or other entity . . . to hire, or to recruit or refer for a fee,for employment in the United States an alien knowing the alien is an unauthorized alien.” 8 U. S. C. §1324a(a)(1)(A)."

"The Chamber of Commerce of the United States and various busi-ness and civil rights organizations (collectively Chamber) filed this federal pre-enforcement suit against those charged with administering the Arizona law, arguing that the state law’s license suspension and revocation provisions were both expressly and impliedly pre-empted by federal immigration law, and that the mandatory use of E-Verify was impliedly preempted."

The decision further opined: "The Chamber’s argument that the Arizona law is not a “licensing” law be-cause it operates only to suspend and revoke licenses rather than to grant them is without basis in law, fact, or logic.

"But Arizona’s procedures simply implement the sanctions that Congress expressly allowed the States to pursue through licensing laws." 

"Arizona’s law closely tracks IRCA’s provisions in all material respects. For example, it adopts the federal definition of who qualifies as an “unauthorized alien,” . . . provides that state investigators must verify the work authorization of an allegedly unauthorized alien with the Federal Government, making no independent determination of the matter; and requires a state court to “consider only the federal government’s determination,” .

Tuesday, May 03, 2011

Utah County GOP Delegates Support Guest Worker Amnesty Repeal

On Saturday, April 30, the delegates to the Utah County Republican Convention discussed, voted on, and approved the resolution to Repeal HB 116 the legislation to promote and create a Utah Guest Worker Permit.

The joined their colleagues  from Salt Lake County who passed a similar measure a few weeks ago.

Attendees reports:

Repeal Passes. 443 to 365.

55%  with an attendance (vote) of 808 out of 1400 ? Total delegates in the home county of the Governor.

The Final Credentials Report said that 906 of 1445 delegates (63%) attended today.

Kerri Witte was awesome!  Chris Herrod was calm as a cucumber!    Kerri and Chris spoke calmly, respectfully and the other side just couldn't contain themselves with their bitterness and it came through.
Chris Herrod gave a persuasive presentation with charts and numbers on the projection screen behind him (although some parts of some of his slides were too faint to read). He contrasted the US of 100 years ago (where the percentages of people from other countries were approximately equal) with the US of today (where the percentage of people from Mexico is SIX times greater than the next highest country). He characterized the current US policy as institutional racism, and underscored how unfair the US is being to aliens who are trying to come in the front door. Standing behind Chris at the podium were Carl Wimmer, Margaret Dayton, Ken Sumsion I think, and Rep. Grover. Chris' wife provided the exclamation point of his ten-minute allotment when she the last 45 seconds to plead for fairness/equity in behalf of the many people who are waiting to come here legally.

Chris Herrod also did one of the best speeches I've heard him give on this topic.  He was very classy, especially at the end when he acknowledged that he had great respect for those who are on the other side of the issue from him.

Holly Richardson and the gov who spoke against the resolution had bitter, angry voices and spoke loudly!

Holly Richardson spoke for seven minutes, and the Governor spoke for three. Behind them were John Valentine, Curt Bramble, Lt. Gov. Bell, and maybe one or two others. Holly focuses on the need to do something, she said HB 116 was constitutional and was not amnesty, and she described several aspects of the bill, and why it was the right thing to do. Governor Herbert was more animated and passionate in his speech than I've ever seen him. He was gesturing with his hands, leaning into the microphone at times, expressively declaring that this was a state sovereignty issue, and that Utah had to do something because the federal government was not doing their part.

In closing his remarks, Governor Herbert said something like this, "Doing NOTHING is NOT an OPTION!"

In opening her remarks seconds later, fiery Keri Witte (who might have been a little nervous before addressing the crowd of nearly 1000 delegates, but who was now angry :--) said, "With all due respect, Governor, doing the WRONG THING is NOT an OPTION!"

Keri Witte took three minutes to introduce the resolution--did great! Then came two or three speakers AGAINST, and the same number FOR. Brandon Beckham spoke FOR the resolution, eloquently and calmly. Arturo Morales-Llan brought the house down with his speech--very persuasive!

When the chair asked the body whether they wanted to hear more speakers, the body said no way--let's vote. So we did.

Utah County GOP passes anti-guest worker resolution | The Salt ...

Apr 30, 2011 ... Spanish Fork • A resolution seeking to repeal a guest worker immigration bill scored a major victory Saturday when it narrowly won ...

GOP CONVENTION: Utah County GOP leaders vote to oppose guest ...

Apr 30, 2011 ... GOP lawmakers met to discuss numerous issues at the Utah County Republican Convention with the debate over illegal immigration taking the ...

Utah County Republicans pass resolution to repeal HB116 | Deseret News

Apr 30, 2011 ... Utah Republican Party Chairman Thomas Wright said the immigration issue is "
hotly contested" in Utah. The endorsement of the resolution ...


Friday, April 29, 2011

If I Were a Utah County Delegate

Utah County Republicans will be considering a resolution to repeal Guest Worker Amnesty tomorrow (aka HB 116.)

For what it's worth, in my opinion, here is what needs to be said to the Utah delegates tomorrow. (Anyone wanting to adopt any portion is welcome to it.)

We Republicans have strongly spoken against amnesty - legalizing the illegal. We collectively understand that rewarding bad behavior simply encourages more of the same.

We understand that the welfare state, encouraging government dependence, is a recipe for continuing disaster. We should also understand that the welfare state and open borders are incompatible.

Importing poverty is not the solution - exporting the principles of LIBERTY and FREEDOM is.

But, somehow, many in Utah have been swayed by the slick public relation campaign entitled the Utah Compact. Some have been persuaded that pseudo-compassion directed SOLELY towards successful resident lawbreakers is the Utah Solution, forgetting those patiently waiting to come legally.

The former GOP Chair, was reported in the Salt Lake Tribune saying that he is "alarmed" at calls for repeal and that "Utah is not encouraging any kind of illegal behavior." 

(he’s been so “alarmed” by the repeal movement against the guest worker bill, he decided to send an email blast to delegates in anticipation of Saturday’s meeting to convince delegates that the resolution is a bad idea. “Opponents are embracing an approach where they simply don’t want to recognize the reality of the situation we’re in,”  “Utah is not encouraging any kind of illegal behavior. It is dealing with a reality.”)

Not only does this legislation encourage illegal behavior, it condones and supports it. It even left the door open until the middle of May to encourage more to partake of the misplaced beneficence and forgiveness of Utahns. In addition to forgiving identity theft, I-9 perjury, etc. on the behalf of the illegal alien employee, the bill also absolves the employer.

Amnesty, however one looks at it.

But this bill went even further - by proposing selling residency in Utah to the undocumented alien guest worker's extended family, if they can successfully breach the border.

The main promoters of this Amnesty proposal, the Salt Lake Chamber and the Sutherland Institute have long championed the cheap labor philosophy towards bottom line profit. Even in 2008, the Chamber was promoting giving every Utah "undocumented immigrant an opportunity to be classified as a guest worker."

This is not a issue of religion. This is a matter of law. This is a matter of supporting Republican Party platform planks at the county, state and national level. This is a matter of principle.

It is time to reign in these policies, voting for this repeal resolution will be a step in the right direction.

Saturday, April 23, 2011

A Few Answers to Statements About Utah Guest Worker Bill

Answering a few statements supporting Utah Guest Worker illegal alien amnesty bill:

This isn't amnesty, because they are paying a fine.”
The fine is for overstaying a visa or illegal entry, so they do get amnesty for any other crimes they committed (ID theft, etc. in obtaining jobs, etc.) for which they have not been arrested or convicted.  Additionally, the employers who employed the illegal are also being given amnesty for their crime.

This isn't amnesty, because they are not getting citizenship.”

The Guest worker would not, of itself, be a “pathway” to citizenship at this point. They could, however, be eligible if federal law was changed. It does provide a pathway to their children through the current interpretation of the fourteenth amendment.

We can't just round them up and deport them.”

None of the Utah groups opposing Guest Worker amnesty have suggested that. Enforcing current federal and state law will cause an attrition in the number of illegal aliens in Utah. Providing benefits (Driver Privilege Cards, welfare benefits, Instate Tuition, English Lessons, special focused education, et al) will simply encourage more to come and remain. A country on our southern border has been very successful in 'deporting' umpteen million unemployed workers without 'rounding them up.'

We need the workers”

No too long ago, teenagers and students could get jobs in the fast food industry. Recently Utah had an unemployment rate over 8 %.

We need to be compassionate”

We also need compassion for those patiently waiting to come to the US legally, and compassion for those unable to find employment.

The illegals are paying taxes.”

Show us the PROOF. Yes, they may pay sales tax. Some may actually pay FICA (under a fake or stolen SSN), but simple instruction can (and undoubtedly does) advise them to put 10 exemptions on a W-4 thereby avoiding withholding.

We need younger workers too support Social Security”

Attempting to back up a bankrupt system through illegal workers' “contributions” simply delays the inevitable needed corrections.

Alien workers are needed to keep food costs down.”

Farmlaborers account for 8% or less of the cost of a head of lettuce.

We can't break up families.”

Families are being broken up when the breadwinner leave them behind to come to the US to gain illegal employment. Families are also broken up when some individuals are incarcerated for crimes.

TheUtah Compact supports undocumented workers.”

The Utah Compact says nothing about illegal immigration or undocumented workers. It merely recites some platitudes about immigration. 

We need a guest worker program in some industries.”

If we “need” a “guest worker,” shouldn't we actually invite them to come rather than legitimize them after they are here?

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Legislative Ratings on Immigration Legislation

The 2011 UFIRE rating for the recent session of the Utah Legislature has been released. Utahns for Immigration Reform and Enforcement (UFIRE) awarded an “A” to 17 House members and 4 Senators. The report is based on votes and actions toward solving the continuing problems with illegal immigration in Utah.

The overall grade for both legislative bodies was a “D.” The complete report can be accessed at

Among the legislative leaders were Representatives Steve Sandstrom, Chris Herrod and Carl Wimmer with A+ ratings. Senators Margaret Dayton, Steve Urquhart and David Hinkins led the Senate, with Sen. Thatcher at A-

The fifth annual UFIRE ratings for the 2011 legislative session found legislators generally lacking in an understanding of the solution to illegal immigration (Attrition through Enforcement), or persuaded by pseudo-compassion arguments, or simply unable to take seriously their Constitutional oaths and the concept of the Rule of Law.

With an abundance of legislation, hearings, debates and votes, 2011 provided a better picture of the commitment to creating a fair immigration policy for ALL people who wish to try to immigrate to the United States by enforcing current law.

HB 116 will further encourage more illegal aliens, in violation of 8 USC 1324, to opt to come to Utah as it gives them until May 10, 2011 to arrive and avail themselves of the proposed “Guest Worker” Permit and, for a fee, to bring most of their relatives.

UFIRE looks forward to restoration of adherence to federal law and the wishes of the citizens in controlling this rampant disregard of immigration law and proper principles. Hopefully the ratings may help Utahns gain an understanding of who is, and is not, in favor.

LDS Church and Immigration

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, after the controversy over the passage of guest worker amnesty for illegal aliens in Utah, has issued a statement entitled "Immigration Response"  stating, in part:

"The Church appreciates the package of bills that the legislature had passed, including House Bill 116.    . .  .    The February 28 Deseret News editorial, "A Model For The Nation" also accurately reflects the position of the Church regarding immigration reform, including measures that will allow those who are now here illegally to work legally, provide for their families and become better contributing members of our community—but without establishing a path to citizenship or granting amnesty."
A report by a lay member of the Church concerning some of the history of the "The Mormon Church and Illegal Immigration" was conicidentally published earlier this month.

Sutherland Institute's Paul Mero Speaks OUT

The leader of the Sutherland Institute, and one of primary proponents of the HB 116, Guest Worker Amnesty bills - or legalizing the illegal, or sale of legal Utah residency to a selected group of people.

This article might be construed as the epitome of arrogance.  (as this blog is apparently written by one to whom he refers to as "wingnuts" in his 'conservative' certainty.)  We'll leave it to the reader to decide.

"we strive to match our candor with civility." "Right-wing political extremism is alive and well in Utah."  “We’ve been able to break through that political barrier put up by the wing nuts who see every brown person as a criminal.”

"But not once has any of these anti-immigrant activists explained just how more than 100,000 undocumented immigrants were physically to be rounded up and deported." 

Mr. Mero, the pro legal immigrant activist in Utah are not suggested rounding up and deporting, they ARE suggesting enforcing current federal and state laws and they will deport themselves. Nor have they declared your racist statement about "brown people."  You call this civility, I call it disingenuous arrogance - on your part.

Educate employers that they are hurting the state economy by denying jobs to Utahns with a recent unemployment rate of 8+% well 80,000 illegals are working.

The only thing he may have gotten right is this statement:
"Perhaps a reasonable person could say of these remarks, "It takes one to know one." Perhaps it does. And perhaps I am that person. In speaking for Sutherland Institute I have my own style and tone that often leans more toward candor than civility, rather than seeking their complementarity."

Here's the DNews article covering the rant:
Sutherland Institute takes aim at "right-wing extremism" in ...

In the Sutherland Institute's addendum to its 2004 treatise "The Poison of Extremism," executive director Paul T. Mero takes aim at what he refers to as the ...

For these wonderful musings, in 2009, Mr. Mero was paid $128,776.

Here are Sutherland 990 forms from 2003 - 2010   Total 2009 contributions $1,335,989, All but $62K spent

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

HB 116 and GRAMA

Utah's HB 116 (Illegal Alien Guest Worker program) is bad legislation and has its own problems.

Many questions are flowing on the Internet facebook and emails about  HB 116 and the GRAMA law (HB 477)   Here's an explanation for those wondering, HB 116 does make a minor change to Grama. (When legislation is written and a change (however minor) is proposed the entire code section is generally provided to provide the context of the change.)

Here is the change:

Line 481 municipality[.]; and

482 (61) a record described in Section 63G-12-210 .

Here's the "fine print" - all NEW law:
885 63G-12-210. Verification of valid permit -- Protected status of information.
* * *

895 (2) Subject to Section 63G-12-212 , a record under this part is a protected record under  Chapter 2, Government Records Access and Management Act, except that a record may not be shared under Section 63G-2-206 , unless:

898 (a) requested by the Office of Legislative Auditor General in accordance with Section 36-12-15 ;

900 (b) disclosed to the State Tax Commission as provided in Subsection 63G-12-203 (2)(e)(vi); or

902 (c) disclosed to a federal government entity in accordance with this part or a waiver, exemption, or authorization described in Section 63G-12-202 .
 * * *

933 63G-12-212. Sharing of information related to enforcement.

934 (1) The department shall provide the notice described in Subsection (2), if the department determines that an undocumented individual:

936 (a) has the undocumented individual's permit revoked; or

937 (b) permits the undocumented individual's permit to expire and the department has reason to believe that the undocumented individual continues to reside in the state.

939 (2) (a) The department shall provide the notice required by Subsection (1) to:

940 (i) Utah's attorney general; and

941 (ii) United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

942 (b) The notice described in Subsection (2)(a) shall:

943 (i) include:

944 (A) the last known address of the undocumented individual; and

945 (B) the basis of the notice described in Subsection (1); and

946 (ii) be sent promptly after the day on which the time to appeal, if any, the action that is

947 the basis for the notification under Subsection (1) ends.

If you like a Guest Worker program, this is probably a good code addition - BUT BETTER YET, why not simply apply a similar idea for all DPC holders (illegal aliens) - If you (DPC holder) commit any law infraction (e.g. I-9 perjury, ID theft for employment, et al) your information will be dispensed similarly to ICE.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Lane Beattie on Arquette Show

Attempting to justify HB 116, Beattie made a few errors and raised a few question. He said he supported this because 71% of Utahns favor it. That is a recent poll, 3 years ago the Chamber was proposing legalize the illegal, so it is NOT a new idea to them. Check the Chamber website or Salt lake Chamber page.

He also said that most illegals are paying taxes - where does he get that information. The legislative review note for Robles SB 60 indicated that it would create an additiona; $81 million from new taxes - inconsistency.

He also talk about SB 81 (and hinted at SB 251) Everify. The problem is there is NO enforcement, no no penalty. The Majority of the "leaders" appear to be ignoring the law.

There's more, but I'm still trying to find someone to explain violating 8 USC 1324 (which was also included in HB 116) When is someone going to prosecute any of the leaders of this amnesty movement for ENCOURAGING illegals to reside in the state. It is now illegal in the state of Utah, as well as federal law.

What will the Utah AG do about that? (Rhetorical question)

BTW, the petition is still alive.

Governor Herbert fails to listen

That's all I'll say at this time. 
Scroll down the page for more.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

Petition To Veto HB 116

To further encourage Gov. Herbert a new petition has been posted.

Sign the petition

OVER 3,500 Utahns have signed within days
Thank you to all who have signed and will sign.     Time is short!!!

For more infomation, such as Utah Everify Users lists, illegal alien crime list, news articles, UFIRE newsletter subscription. etc. click here to go to UFIRE website,

Sen. Bramble Pontificates on RedMeat Radio

Open letter to Rep. H . . . , Host of KtKK redmeat radio,

Thank you for your attempt (however feeble) to harness the sophistry of, as one of you said - the bulldog, Sen. Bramble. His report was wrong in so many facets.

A few points on the Senator's comments:

  • HB 116 simply proposes to legalize the illegals
  • If they don't like the term "amnesty" how about "sale of Utah residency" for a small fee - (and Utah will even finance that.) HB 116 Line 828 "(ii) one or more payment plans that an undocumented individual may use to pay a fine required under Subsection (4)(a); and"
  • The May 10, 2011 date is not an implementation date, but a date for applying for the guest worker permit. (If it's for those who have been here for a Long time -defacto amnesty, per the Sen. - why not May 10, 2010 or 2001 or. . .)
  • The bill also appears to be an amnesty for those employers who currently have illegal employees.
  • As far as "Utah can't round them up and deport them" - Mexico has been very successful in "deporting" umpteen million unemployed workers to the US).
  • If we truly want to "solve" the illegal alien problem "Attrition Through Enforcement" works. Not the SL Chamber idea.
  • If the DPC is about auto insurance, why don't they require proof when applying for the DPC? (Insurance is actually on the CAR, not the driver.)
There is an online petition  now available, that has gathered 3,500 signatures - so far, in 3 DAYS - calling for a veto of HB 116. That will soon surpass the signatures on the vaunted Utah Compact - in over 4 MONTHS.

Wednesday, March 09, 2011

Utah AG Shurtleff Lobbying for Utah Amnesty

Utah AG is reportedly in DC lobbying for the Utah style AMNESTY (which is supposedly based on the Utah Compact).  This is being done even before the bill (HB 116), based on the Compact is signed by the Governor.

He must be doing this on his own time (and money) because is AG job mission says nothing about lobbying and testifying about legislation.  
Notice also the mission and duties of the Utah AG refer ONLY to citizens!!   
"The mission of the Office of the Utah Attorney General is to uphold the constitutions of the United States and of Utah, enforce the law, provide counsel to state agencies and public officials, to work with law enforcement and protect the interests of Utah, its people, environment and resources.
With our team of highly qualified attorneys, investigators and staff members, we ensure the law is upheld and the rights of all citizens – no matter how young or old – are preserved. We especially focus on protecting children. We also make every effort to educate the public about safety, justice, liberty and equal opportunity.
As we see it, it is our duty to diligently work with integrity every day to fulfill these responsibilities as we serve the citizens of Utah. That is our entire focus. That is our mission."

How does encouraging 'unauthorized aliens' to reside in Utah coincide with 8 USC 1324?

Monday, March 07, 2011

An Open Letter to Gov. Herbert to VETO HB 116

This bill will accomplish essentially nothing in solving the illegal alien problem in the State of Utah and violates many of your "six guiding principles," the Utah Compact,and, even, federal law and the US Constitution, according to the Legislative Review Note,  "there is a high probability that a court would find that portions of this bill as unconstitutional because they are preempted by federal law as applied through the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States."
Legalization of illegal aliens currently in Utah as Guest Workers is anathema to any sense of fairness or respect for the law. 
Additionally, here are a few more comments on the bill, with reason that it should NOT become law.
  • It rewards illegal behavior by granting Guest Worker permits, thus encouraging more bad behavior.
  • The bill basically rewards unauthorized aliens to the detriment of Utah taxpayers who pay continue to pay their costs, estimated by F.A.I.R. at $453,000,000 annually and by Utah legislative audit at $50 to $85 million for K-12 education alone. 
  • It allows ONLY unauthorized aliens temporary resident status as guest workers.
  • It even allows illegal alien to come to Utah until May 10 to partake of the pending legalization benefits. 
  • It does not restrict previous unauthorized alien residents from returning to Utah to become guest workers.
  • It effectively delays ANY effective enforcement action for at least two years.
  • There were other proposals for proper Guest Worker program allowing application from their home countries. 
  • The fiscal note is internally inconsistent.
  • The bill eliminates the current Public employer verification requirements (SB 81).
  • It provides for more potential alien students to qualify for instate tuition in 2013, in further violation of the provision "If allowed  under federal law" predicated on the passage of the failed Dream Act.
  • It provides no accountability for employers who currently, or for the next two years, continue to employ unauthorized aliens.
  • By allowing the status quo for two years, it does nothing to help reduce the Utah unemployment rate, or return vacancies to many of the jobs once held by Utah teenagers.
  • While it does create a victims recovery fund, it does virtually nothing to stem the increasing tide of identity theft in Utah.
  • The bill violates 8 USC 1324 at the same time it adds those same provision to Utah law. "(2) It is unlawful for a person to: . . . (c) encourage or induce an alien to come to, enter, or reside in this state, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that the alien's coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law;"  
It seems quite obvious that 'persons' in Utah, through this proposed legislation, are encouraging alien to reside in Utah and "know . . .that the alien's . . . residence is . . . in violation of law."  In fact, the 2013 implementation date virtually guarantees at least a continuing two year plus term of quasi-legal residency.
As a fellow Republican, I would also remind you that this proposal is  also counter to both the Utah GOP Platform on Immigration AND the Republican National Platform.