Immigrants push for reforms at rallies across U.S.

[panamania79 2]

This seems to be more Illegals Immigrants wanting someone to believe what they are doing is ok

Just like the war on drugs is broken.

Correction,the war on drugs is a JOKE !

[peejay 327]

E-Verify (formerly the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program) is an online system operated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Participating employers can check the work status of new hires online by comparing information from an employee's I-9 form against SSA and Department of Homeland Security databases. More than 87,000 employers are enrolled in the program, with over 6.5 million queries run so far in fiscal year 2008.

E-Verify is free and voluntary, and is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm

I think there were some concerns about it being mandatory. I think that's what the issue is about.

No sh*t? If it were mandatory then the usual suspects would be in a jam...wouldn't they? No wonder they are against it and will fight against it tooth and nail. What is so surprising about criminals not wanting the law enforced?

You seem to act surprised that illegal aliens, their cheerleaders, and unscrupulous employers are against E-Verify. Yes, of course they are. Obviously.

[scandal 951]

E-Verify (formerly the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program) is an online system operated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Participating employers can check the work status of new hires online by comparing information from an employee's I-9 form against SSA and Department of Homeland Security databases. More than 87,000 employers are enrolled in the program, with over 6.5 million queries run so far in fiscal year 2008.

E-Verify is free and voluntary, and is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm

I think there were some concerns about it being mandatory. I think that's what the issue is about.

The biggest concern is the requirement for an onsite inspection of employement records prior to approval. Now, who would be concerned about that issue?

I posted yesterday on this thread to the effect that at least one of the criticisms of e-Verify has to do with fears that it's based on faulty databases. I have no idea if that's true. If it is - I think it's a reasonable fear. I certainly wouldn't want my name, or that of someone I care about, coming up with a false hit from an e-Verify search and consequently being denied employment or otherwise running into a government roadblock. If the system is going to be widely used to exclude illegals, we better make sure it's implemented right. If that's actually the only problem with e-Verify then it's no longer an ideological battle but just a technical one that can be resolved by hiring some developers and DBAs to get it right. On the other hand, I'm not so naive as to think there aren't vested interests in this country who are quite happy to have cheap illegal labor here, and they've got the K-Street lobbies to push their agenda.

Here's the relevant bit from the previous post:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Friday described the E-Verify system as a "flawed" verification program. Including E-Verify in the stimulus bill would have held Americans "hostage to bad government data and even worse government database systems," said Tim Sparapani, senior legislative counsel at the ACLU. He noted that the databases on which the E-Verify program is based are outdated and flawed.

"The reason why we don't have mandatory verification is because the government hasn't done the hard work of going back and scrubbing those databases clean" of flawed and outdated information, he said. Neither has there been any effort to build system for helping out individuals erroneously identified by the system as being ineligible to work in the U.S., he said.

E-Verify opponents said its use made the employment verification process unreliable and would not have stopped people from using fraudulent IDs to get work authorization. They had also noted that many state and local governments have not signed up for the program, meaning they would have had to roll out cumbersome new processes for hiring workers and checking eligibility. Questions were also raised about the system's ability to handle a sudden surge in e-verification requests.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

E-Verify (formerly the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program) is an online system operated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Participating employers can check the work status of new hires online by comparing information from an employee's I-9 form against SSA and Department of Homeland Security databases. More than 87,000 employers are enrolled in the program, with over 6.5 million queries run so far in fiscal year 2008.

E-Verify is free and voluntary, and is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm

I think there were some concerns about it being mandatory. I think that's what the issue is about.

No sh*t? If it were mandatory then the usual suspects would be in a jam...wouldn't they? No wonder they are against it and will fight against it tooth and nail. What is so surprising about criminals not wanting the law enforced?

You seem to act surprised that illegal aliens, their cheerleaders, and unscrupulous employers are against E-Verify. Yes, of course they are. Obviously.

No I'm not surprised. I'm just not as cynical as you are.

E-Verify (formerly the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program) is an online system operated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Participating employers can check the work status of new hires online by comparing information from an employee's I-9 form against SSA and Department of Homeland Security databases. More than 87,000 employers are enrolled in the program, with over 6.5 million queries run so far in fiscal year 2008.

E-Verify is free and voluntary, and is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm

I think there were some concerns about it being mandatory. I think that's what the issue is about.

The biggest concern is the requirement for an onsite inspection of employement records prior to approval. Now, who would be concerned about that issue?

I posted yesterday on this thread to the effect that at least one of the criticisms of e-Verify has to do with fears that it's based on faulty databases. I have no idea if that's true. If it is - I think it's a reasonable fear. I certainly wouldn't want my name, or that of someone I care about, coming up with a false hit from an e-Verify search and consequently being denied employment or otherwise running into a government roadblock. If the system is going to be widely used to exclude illegals, we better make sure it's implemented right. If that's actually the only problem with e-Verify then it's no longer an ideological battle but just a technical one that can be resolved by hiring some developers and DBAs to get it right. On the other hand, I'm not so naive as to think there aren't vested interests in this country who are quite happy to have cheap illegal labor here, and they've got the K-Street lobbies to push their agenda.

Here's the relevant bit from the previous post:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Friday described the E-Verify system as a "flawed" verification program. Including E-Verify in the stimulus bill would have held Americans "hostage to bad government data and even worse government database systems," said Tim Sparapani, senior legislative counsel at the ACLU. He noted that the databases on which the E-Verify program is based are outdated and flawed.

"The reason why we don't have mandatory verification is because the government hasn't done the hard work of going back and scrubbing those databases clean" of flawed and outdated information, he said. Neither has there been any effort to build system for helping out individuals erroneously identified by the system as being ineligible to work in the U.S., he said.

E-Verify opponents said its use made the employment verification process unreliable and would not have stopped people from using fraudulent IDs to get work authorization. They had also noted that many state and local governments have not signed up for the program, meaning they would have had to roll out cumbersome new processes for hiring workers and checking eligibility. Questions were also raised about the system's ability to handle a sudden surge in e-verification requests.

There was a high error rate (over 10%) I think up until last year. Supposedly it has improved since then.

[peejay 327]

E-Verify (formerly the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program) is an online system operated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Participating employers can check the work status of new hires online by comparing information from an employee's I-9 form against SSA and Department of Homeland Security databases. More than 87,000 employers are enrolled in the program, with over 6.5 million queries run so far in fiscal year 2008.

E-Verify is free and voluntary, and is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm

I think there were some concerns about it being mandatory. I think that's what the issue is about.

No sh*t? If it were mandatory then the usual suspects would be in a jam...wouldn't they? No wonder they are against it and will fight against it tooth and nail. What is so surprising about criminals not wanting the law enforced?

You seem to act surprised that illegal aliens, their cheerleaders, and unscrupulous employers are against E-Verify. Yes, of course they are. Obviously.

No I'm not surprised. I'm just not as cynical as you are.

You also probably were not here in the USA in 1986 to see how this started and how it has turned out. Cynical? How about a realist?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Whatever floats your boat buddy.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

E-Verify (formerly the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program) is an online system operated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Participating employers can check the work status of new hires online by comparing information from an employee's I-9 form against SSA and Department of Homeland Security databases. More than 87,000 employers are enrolled in the program, with over 6.5 million queries run so far in fiscal year 2008.

E-Verify is free and voluntary, and is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm

I think there were some concerns about it being mandatory. I think that's what the issue is about.

The biggest concern is the requirement for an onsite inspection of employement records prior to approval. Now, who would be concerned about that issue?

I posted yesterday on this thread to the effect that at least one of the criticisms of e-Verify has to do with fears that it's based on faulty databases. I have no idea if that's true. If it is - I think it's a reasonable fear. I certainly wouldn't want my name, or that of someone I care about, coming up with a false hit from an e-Verify search and consequently being denied employment or otherwise running into a government roadblock. If the system is going to be widely used to exclude illegals, we better make sure it's implemented right. If that's actually the only problem with e-Verify then it's no longer an ideological battle but just a technical one that can be resolved by hiring some developers and DBAs to get it right. On the other hand, I'm not so naive as to think there aren't vested interests in this country who are quite happy to have cheap illegal labor here, and they've got the K-Street lobbies to push their agenda.

Here's the relevant bit from the previous post:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Friday described the E-Verify system as a "flawed" verification program. Including E-Verify in the stimulus bill would have held Americans "hostage to bad government data and even worse government database systems," said Tim Sparapani, senior legislative counsel at the ACLU. He noted that the databases on which the E-Verify program is based are outdated and flawed.

"The reason why we don't have mandatory verification is because the government hasn't done the hard work of going back and scrubbing those databases clean" of flawed and outdated information, he said. Neither has there been any effort to build system for helping out individuals erroneously identified by the system as being ineligible to work in the U.S., he said.

E-Verify opponents said its use made the employment verification process unreliable and would not have stopped people from using fraudulent IDs to get work authorization. They had also noted that many state and local governments have not signed up for the program, meaning they would have had to roll out cumbersome new processes for hiring workers and checking eligibility. Questions were also raised about the system's ability to handle a sudden surge in e-verification requests.

The opposition to E-Verify often claims that the program has a high error rate. Some critics claim that the error rate is as high as 4% and will lead to millions of Americans losing their jobs by mistake.

To see how wrong this claim is, we need to look more closely at how E-Verify works. We can draw a precise picture of what happens to a thousand applicants who use E-Verify by using data gathered from October 2006 to March 2007 by Westat, an independent reviewer.

Of the thousand, 942 are instantly verified. Instant verification of legal workers surely can’t be an error.

Fifty-eight are told that they have to do something more to establish that they are lawfully authorized to work. Usually this means they have to go to Social Security to correct the mismatch in name and number. (Typos and similar problems are cured on line, so legal workers usually have a problem only if they changed their names or citizenship status but failed to tell Social Security of the change.)

So five of the thousand must go to Social Security and straighten out their records. For 90% of them, the process takes less than 2 days. Is that an error rate? If so, it’s ten times lower than our critics claim. And, is it really an error to tell workers that their social security credits aren’t being properly recorded? Sooner or later, the worker will want to collect benefits, and they won’t want to face doubts about who earned the credits. (Of course, straightening out Social Security records isn’t fun, but we’re working to reduce the hassle. Just a few weeks ago, we introduced software changes that will automate some of the correction process, reducing the number of legitimate workers who have to go to Social Security offices from five to two or three per thousand.)

That leaves the 53 who walk away. Is that an error rate? There are certainly people who believe it’s an error to keep illegal workers out of the U.S. workforce. But we don’t. It’s our job to enforce the immigration laws.

And common sense suggests that the walkaways are overwhelmingly likely to be illegal workers. It’s just common sense that a legal worker wouldn’t want to walk away from a job he applied for--and has been offered if he straightens out his records. It’s just common sense that a legal worker wouldn’t walk away from the opportunity to correct Social Security records he now knows are wrong – records that will have to be corrected for him to get benefits. And it’s just common sense that about five percent of E-Verify workers would walk away, since a Pew Foundation expert recently estimated that 4.9% of U.S. jobs are held by illegal workers. It’s hard to see the walkaway rate as an error; in fact, that’s the program working as it should.

Stewart Baker

Assistant Secretary for Policy

http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/2008...error-rate.html

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

E-Verify (formerly the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program) is an online system operated jointly by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Participating employers can check the work status of new hires online by comparing information from an employee's I-9 form against SSA and Department of Homeland Security databases. More than 87,000 employers are enrolled in the program, with over 6.5 million queries run so far in fiscal year 2008.

E-Verify is free and voluntary, and is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1185221678150.shtm

I think there were some concerns about it being mandatory. I think that's what the issue is about.

The biggest concern is the requirement for an onsite inspection of employement records prior to approval. Now, who would be concerned about that issue?

I posted yesterday on this thread to the effect that at least one of the criticisms of e-Verify has to do with fears that it's based on faulty databases. I have no idea if that's true. If it is - I think it's a reasonable fear. I certainly wouldn't want my name, or that of someone I care about, coming up with a false hit from an e-Verify search and consequently being denied employment or otherwise running into a government roadblock. If the system is going to be widely used to exclude illegals, we better make sure it's implemented right. If that's actually the only problem with e-Verify then it's no longer an ideological battle but just a technical one that can be resolved by hiring some developers and DBAs to get it right. On the other hand, I'm not so naive as to think there aren't vested interests in this country who are quite happy to have cheap illegal labor here, and they've got the K-Street lobbies to push their agenda.

Here's the relevant bit from the previous post:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Friday described the E-Verify system as a "flawed" verification program. Including E-Verify in the stimulus bill would have held Americans "hostage to bad government data and even worse government database systems," said Tim Sparapani, senior legislative counsel at the ACLU. He noted that the databases on which the E-Verify program is based are outdated and flawed.

"The reason why we don't have mandatory verification is because the government hasn't done the hard work of going back and scrubbing those databases clean" of flawed and outdated information, he said. Neither has there been any effort to build system for helping out individuals erroneously identified by the system as being ineligible to work in the U.S., he said.

E-Verify opponents said its use made the employment verification process unreliable and would not have stopped people from using fraudulent IDs to get work authorization. They had also noted that many state and local governments have not signed up for the program, meaning they would have had to roll out cumbersome new processes for hiring workers and checking eligibility. Questions were also raised about the system's ability to handle a sudden surge in e-verification requests.

The opposition to E-Verify often claims that the program has a high error rate. Some critics claim that the error rate is as high as 4% and will lead to millions of Americans losing their jobs by mistake.

To see how wrong this claim is, we need to look more closely at how E-Verify works. We can draw a precise picture of what happens to a thousand applicants who use E-Verify by using data gathered from October 2006 to March 2007 by Westat, an independent reviewer.

Of the thousand, 942 are instantly verified. Instant verification of legal workers surely can’t be an error.

Fifty-eight are told that they have to do something more to establish that they are lawfully authorized to work. Usually this means they have to go to Social Security to correct the mismatch in name and number. (Typos and similar problems are cured on line, so legal workers usually have a problem only if they changed their names or citizenship status but failed to tell Social Security of the change.)

So five of the thousand must go to Social Security and straighten out their records. For 90% of them, the process takes less than 2 days. Is that an error rate? If so, it’s ten times lower than our critics claim. And, is it really an error to tell workers that their social security credits aren’t being properly recorded? Sooner or later, the worker will want to collect benefits, and they won’t want to face doubts about who earned the credits. (Of course, straightening out Social Security records isn’t fun, but we’re working to reduce the hassle. Just a few weeks ago, we introduced software changes that will automate some of the correction process, reducing the number of legitimate workers who have to go to Social Security offices from five to two or three per thousand.)

That leaves the 53 who walk away. Is that an error rate? There are certainly people who believe it’s an error to keep illegal workers out of the U.S. workforce. But we don’t. It’s our job to enforce the immigration laws.

And common sense suggests that the walkaways are overwhelmingly likely to be illegal workers. It’s just common sense that a legal worker wouldn’t want to walk away from a job he applied for--and has been offered if he straightens out his records. It’s just common sense that a legal worker wouldn’t walk away from the opportunity to correct Social Security records he now knows are wrong – records that will have to be corrected for him to get benefits. And it’s just common sense that about five percent of E-Verify workers would walk away, since a Pew Foundation expert recently estimated that 4.9% of U.S. jobs are held by illegal workers. It’s hard to see the walkaway rate as an error; in fact, that’s the program working as it should.

Stewart Baker

Assistant Secretary for Policy

http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/2008...error-rate.html

Supposedly it was a DHS study that identified the 10.9% error rate in 2006. That's since been cut to about 6%.

[scandal 951]

Thank you. That is very informative and is compelling.If indeed the remaining "error" rate of 5% correlates closely to the estimated number of illegal workers in the workforce (they cite a Pew study), I would agree that this is dramatic evidence of the effectiveness of e-Verify at weeding out illegals while not hampering legal workers. If it's as good claimed here, sign me up as a supporter.

[Heracles 417]

What we appear to have learned here is:

1. You can bet all your like. My statements are not false. I'm not going to spending time citing or substantiating every point of view in a forum. Discuss the point rather than whether you 'think' it is true or not. This is not a thesis. If you strongly believe I am wrong then you cite evidence of it.

2. No, my friend works for the department of immigration. Therefore, obviously he has a good idea about the immigration process or another country.

3. Irrelevant point. Illegal aliens are illegal aliens, regardless of the number.

4. No sh-t. One of many countries who use the system.

5. Illegal immigration is nowhere near as big of a problem in countries like the UK as it is here. Yet not too long ago they announced quite touch and proactive measures to tackle it. Already been cited before.

6. Also a matter of fact.

Been down this road with many many here before so I am not going to go down this road again.