Welcome To The Dark Side Of Illegal Immigration

[rebeccajo 14]

We already have a verification system.

It's called the I-9 form. It's more on par with 'carding' people.

I'll be in favor of E-Verify when it stops having false hits. Or when we can be sure employers won't abuse it by 'checking' the status of workers after the initial verification.

problems with that is - how many employers know how to tell if the i-9 is valid? and what prevents someone from "acquiring" a fake one?

additionally, one could just say they are a usc and bypass the i-9 entirely.

it's my opinion we need e-verify, and yes, the bugs should be worked out of it posthaste.

The I-9 is a form that requires the employer to get two forms of identification from the employee. There are three lists of 'acceptable' ID and one has to acquire one from one list and one from one of the other lists. Essentially, Driving license, Birth Cert or Passport type ID plus SSN#. The I-9 is not a form of identification in and of itself. Additionally, this applies to all employees, not just furriners.

..........which means privacy is invaded again.

Funny thing about those laws we make to keep out the "unwanted". They have a way of getting into the hair of the "law abiders"............

[scandal 951]

This is from testimony to Congress this year, 2009

Note the following key parts - successful hits are now 96.1%

Of the "failing" 3.9%, 0.4% successfully appealed and were cleared by the system.

That leaves 3.5% - people who either did not appeal, or who were denied upon appeal - because they were illegal.

Note that the purpose of eVerify should NEVER be to reach 100% - we know there are illegal people seeking jobs, that's the whole point!

These statistics look pretty compelling to me. I did not cite the whole testimony, no one appreciates walls of text

- follow the link for further plans to improve the system in 2010 and beyond.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/men...0004718190aRCRD

Testimony of Michael Aytes, Acting Deputy Director USCIS

E-Verify has grown exponentially in the past several years. Much of this increase is due to a growing number of States that have passed laws requiring all or some of the employers in their State to use E-Verify. Currently over 117,000 employers are enrolled, representing over 456,000 locations. An average of 1,000 employers enroll each week and participation has more than doubled each fiscal year since 2007. Employers have run over 3.6 million queries thus far in FY 2009. The volume of queries doubled from FY 2007 to FY 2008 from 3.27 million to 6.6 million, and in fact today, according to an analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data, over 14 percent of all nonagricultural new hires in the U.S are run though E-Verify.

The current independent evaluation of E-Verify, conducted by the Westat Corporation, (which can be found on www.uscis.gov) found that approximately 96.1 percent of all cases queried through E-Verify were automatically verified as work authorized. The 96.1 percent figure represents a significant improvement over the figures from earlier evaluations, which found that the automatic verification rate improved from 83 percent (in 2002) to 94.7 percent (in 2007). In a recent American Customer Satisfaction Index Survey, E-Verify scored 83 out of a possible 100 on the Customer Satisfaction Index, which is well above the latest Federal Government satisfaction index of 69 percent. More than half of the respondents (51 percent) self-identified as small business owners or employers.

Of all the cases verified through E-Verify, only 3.9 percent of queries resulted in a mismatch, or a Tentative Nonconfirmation (TNC), which is issued when the information queried through E-Verify does not match the information in SSA or DHS databases and requires further action on behalf of the employees to resolve their cases with SSA or DHS.

Of that 3.9 percent who were not immediately authorized, 0.4 percent of queries are those who were issued a TNC and successfully contested the case. The remaining 3.5 percent of queries that are not found work authorized by the system either did not contest the TNC, were unsuccessful in contesting or were found unauthorized to work at the secondary verification stage. Our goal is to continue to improve E-Verify’s ability to instantly verify new hires, improve the accuracy of our data systems, and strengthen training and monitoring of employers to ensure that they understand the program’s requirements and are complying with them.

[Ban Hammer 13,349]

We already have a verification system.

It's called the I-9 form. It's more on par with 'carding' people.

I'll be in favor of E-Verify when it stops having false hits. Or when we can be sure employers won't abuse it by 'checking' the status of workers after the initial verification.

problems with that is - how many employers know how to tell if the i-9 is valid? and what prevents someone from "acquiring" a fake one?

additionally, one could just say they are a usc and bypass the i-9 entirely.

it's my opinion we need e-verify, and yes, the bugs should be worked out of it posthaste.

Because you usually sign it in front of the HR person................

brain fart - i'm thinking i-94

but what prevents the person from claiming to be a usc in the first place?

We already have a verification system.

It's called the I-9 form. It's more on par with 'carding' people.

I'll be in favor of E-Verify when it stops having false hits. Or when we can be sure employers won't abuse it by 'checking' the status of workers after the initial verification.

problems with that is - how many employers know how to tell if the i-9 is valid? and what prevents someone from "acquiring" a fake one?

additionally, one could just say they are a usc and bypass the i-9 entirely.

it's my opinion we need e-verify, and yes, the bugs should be worked out of it posthaste.

The I-9 is a form that requires the employer to get two forms of identification from the employee. There are three lists of 'acceptable' ID and one has to acquire one from one list and one from one of the other lists. Essentially, Driving license, Birth Cert or Passport type ID plus SSN#. The I-9 is not a form of identification in and of itself. Additionally, this applies to all employees, not just furriners.

how many states issue these to anyone, including illegals?

and social security cards are easy to fake.

[Peikko 1,575]

What difference does that make? The I-9 is for ALL employees.

[rebeccajo 14]

Charles...

How does E-Verify stop someone with a legitimate (but stolen) Social Security number (fake card included) with a matching fake driver's license, stop the culprit?

[Ban Hammer 13,349]

Charles...

How does E-Verify stop someone with a legitimate (but stolen) Social Security number (fake card included) with a matching fake driver's license, stop the culprit?

that it won't, but the picture better match

there may be ways around it, but the original intent is aimed at illegals/those not work authorized.

What difference does that make? The I-9 is for ALL employees.

not following, are you?

1. get state issued driver's licence.

2. obtain fake ssn card.

3. claim to be a usc

[scandal 951]

Charles...

How does E-Verify stop someone with a legitimate (but stolen) Social Security number (fake card included) with a matching fake driver's license, stop the culprit?

RJ,

From the same Congressional testimony I linked to above....

E-Verify prevents certain types of document fraud from being used in E-Verify

Some aliens without work authorization use stolen identities to obtain employment. To help address this problem the E-Verify program introduced a photograph screening capability into the verification process in September 2007. The tool allows a participating employer to check the photos on Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) or Permanent Resident Cards (green card) against images stored in USCIS databases, thus allowing employers to determine if the document presented by the employee as a DHS document is a complete fabrication or has been subject to photo-substitution. Through use of the photo tool, hundreds of cases of document and identity fraud have been identified, and unauthorized workers have been prevented from illegally obtaining employment.

USCIS is working to expand the types of documents available to the E-Verify system to provide photo confirmation. Currently, only DHS-issued identity documents are displayed in the photo tool. However, the addition of databases for photo tool verification could lead to increased TNCs because there will be more data to verify and additional government agencies will be involved in the resolution process. An increase in TNC could affect authorized workers, but is also indicative of the photo tool’s success in detecting document fraud.

[rebeccajo 14]

Ron -

That doesn't answer my question.

Remember, just because a person looks or sounds foreign-born, you as an employer cannot require them to produce a document from the Service if they have other documents that meet the criteria of the I9.

Edited June 27, 2009 by rebeccajo

[scandal 951]

Ron -

That doesn't answer my question.

Perhaps not.

eVerify is not infallible. It does not catch all illegals. It occasionally catches up legals in its net, that need a second-layer of processing to be "freed".

It does catch many illegals. My post above certainly indicates that. And it has many safeguards in place to protect the legitimate and innocent.

That's about what we can expect from just about any system. I mean, we trust our very lives to medical systems that have far less rigor put in place!

In this case, what is the worst possible outcome of a false positive? A legal job applicant needs to appeal and justify his/her status. Not good, but not a disaster.

What's the worst outcome of a false negative (i.e. an illegal who gets away with it)? Well, the illegal got away with it. Can happen. But with less frequency than today.

The point I would stress is (and I am not by any means an expert on eVerify), it would appear that there were significant and real concerns about the technology and processes a few years ago - circa 2006-2007.

The system has been vastly improved, and is still improving.

Enough so that any citations of articles or opinion pieces on eVerify MUST be current (this year, 2009) to be credible. Last year's news is no longer news, in this case.

If you have current citations that you believe show eVerify is still too flawed to be useful, I am eager to see them.

My personal belief is that at this point any further roll out of the system is stalled only because of politics, lobbyists, and cynicism. The technical critiques of the system are rapidly becoming moot.

[jundp 191]

When I filled out my I9 at work I had to show proof of citizenship...birth cert or passport. Course, I also have to be ID'ed and go through a security check anyway, but still.

[rebeccajo 14]

http://www.visalaw.com/blog_i9/blog_i9.html

Thursday, June 18, 2009

TOP ICE OFFICIAL: E-VERIFY STILL HAS PROBLEMS

John Morton, assistant secretary for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the Department of Homeland Security, talked about E-Verify on Tuesday:

Morton defended E-Verify, saying that it instantly confirms 97 percent of queries. But he acknowledged that the 3 percent rejection rate, in addition to the detection of unauthorized workers, could signal problems with the system.

“There are a lot of people who are abundantly aware of the criticisms,” Morton said. “They are trying to address them. There is a commitment to getting E-Verify right. We think E-Verify, while recognizing it has some issues, is a good working model.”

[rebeccajo 14]

Besides, here's the stuff that really bothers me about E-Verify. And it bothers me for a very good reason.

*PS - you still dodged the question.*

http://www.visalaw.com/blog_i9/blog_i9.html

The same report outlines the intended ways the data will be used:

• Fraudulent use of Alien-Numbers (A-Numbers) and SSNs by E-Verify users;

• Termination of an employee because he receives a tentative non-confirmation (TNC)

• Failure of an employer to notify DHS, as required by law, when an employee who receives a final non-confirmation (FNC) is not terminated;

• Verification of existing employees (as opposed to new hires);

• Verification of job applicants, rather than new employees (pre-screening);

• Selectively using E-Verify or SAVE for verifications based on foreign appearance, race/ethnicity, or citizenship status;

• Failure to post the notice informing employees of participation in E-Verify;

• Failure to use the E-Verify, consistently or at all, once registered;

• Failure of SAVE agency to initiate additional verification when necessary;

• Unauthorized searching and use of information by a SAVE agency user; and

• Fraudulent use of visas, permits, and other DHS documents by SAVE users

Edited June 27, 2009 by rebeccajo

[rebeccajo 14]

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/05/22/...lance-solution/

E-Verify: The Surveillance Solution

Posted by Jim Harper

The federal government will keep data about every person submitted to the “E-Verify” background check system for 10 years.

At least that’s my read of the slightly unclear notice describing the “United States Citizenship Immigration Services 009 Compliance Tracking and Monitoring System” in today’s Federal Register. (A second notice exempts this data from many protections of the Privacy Act.)

To make sure that people aren’t abusing E-Verify, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Verification Division, Monitoring and Compliance Branch will watch how the system is used. It will look for misuse, such as when a single Social Security Number is submitted to the system many times, which suggests that it is being used fraudulently.

How do you look for this kind of misuse (and others, more clever)? You collect all the data that goes into the system and mine it for patterns consistent with misuse.

The notice purports to limit the range of people whose data will be held in the system, listing “Individuals who are the subject of E-Verify or SAVE verifications and whose employer is subject to compliance activities.” But if the Monitoring Compliance Branch is going to find what it’s looking for, it’s going to look at data about all individuals submitted to E-Verify. “Employer subject to compliance activities” is not a limitation because all employers will be subject to “compliance activities” simply for using the system.

In my paper on electronic employment eligibility verification systems like E-Verify, I wrote how such systems “would add to the data stores throughout the federal government that continually amass information about the lives, livelihoods, activities, and interests of everyone—especially law-abiding citizens.”

It’s in the DNA of E-Verify to facilitate surveillance of every American worker. Today’s Federal Register notice is confirmation of that.

[scandal 951]

With respect to previous post regarding ICE/ John Morton - thanks. That is a useful link.

Note that in links on to a more complete account of Morton's words at http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/26/48/96.php

I think this is consistent with what I said eariler - eVerify is not perfect, there are improvements that can still be made. It's now at a 96% (Morton states 97%) positive response rate. What would be good enough for you? 98%? 99%? It will never and should never go to 100%, because it is designed to reject those who deserve to be rejected! We know they are out there. I'm glad to learn that the illegal working population is as low (<4%) as it appears to be!

Besides, here's the stuff that really bothers me about E-Verify. And it bothers me for a very good reason.

*PS - you still dodged the question.*

http://www.visalaw.com/blog_i9/blog_i9.html

The same report outlines the intended ways the data will be used:

• Fraudulent use of Alien-Numbers (A-Numbers) and SSNs by E-Verify users;

• Termination of an employee because he receives a tentative non-confirmation (TNC)

• Failure of an employer to notify DHS, as required by law, when an employee who receives a final non-confirmation (FNC) is not terminated;

• Verification of existing employees (as opposed to new hires);

• Verification of job applicants, rather than new employees (pre-screening);

• Selectively using E-Verify or SAVE for verifications based on foreign appearance, race/ethnicity, or citizenship status;

• Failure to post the notice informing employees of participation in E-Verify;

• Failure to use the E-Verify, consistently or at all, once registered;

• Failure of SAVE agency to initiate additional verification when necessary;

• Unauthorized searching and use of information by a SAVE agency user; and

• Fraudulent use of visas, permits, and other DHS documents by SAVE users

I didn't dodge your question. You posed it to Charles, not me

Besides, you are right. At this time, a fake SSN + driver's license likely won't get picked up, if they're done convincingly enough. So because some illegals will still get away with it, should we reject a technology that catches others who can be caught? That line of reasoning does not make sense.

Regarding your 2 bold points - the latter one (verifying existing employees) would not concern me. If someone is legal, why should they have any reason to fear this?

The former one does seem harsh. I would expect a tentative non-confirmation of an existing employee to have a time period (e.g. 30 days) to prove error in the system before termination.

[scandal 951]

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/05/22/...lance-solution/

Hmm, so now we're citing the Cato Institute?

That surprises me. I would have expected that from one of our dyed in the wool libertarians, like Matt or GaryC, not from you RJ.

Look, Big Brother is out there. If the fear is government records, what do you think IRS is all about? For that matter, USCIS for every immigrant and naturalized citizen?

Get used to it. Big computer databanks + government have been pals from long, long ago.