Electronic Employment Eligibility Verification: Franz Kafka's Solution to Illegal Immigration

[The Dude 206]

Electronic Employment Eligibility Verification: Franz Kafka's Solution to Illegal Immigration

In last summer's debate over immigration reform, Congress treated a national electronic employment eligibility verification (EEV) system as a matter of near consensus. Intended to strengthen internal enforcement of the immigration laws, electronic EEV is an Internet-based employee vetting system that the federal government would require every employer to use.

Broad immigration reform failed before Congress thoroughly considered national EEV, but the lines of debate have been drawn. Advocates in Congress will try to attach a nationwide worker registration system to any immigration bill Congress considers, and the Bush administration recently announced steps to promote such a system.

A mandatory national EEV system would have substantial costs yet still fail to prevent illegal immigration. It would deny a sizable percentage of law-abiding American citizens the ability to work legally. Deemed ineligible by a database, millions each year would go pleading to the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration for the right to work. By increasing the value of committing identity fraud, EEV would cause that crime's rates to rise.

Creating an accurate EEV system would require a national identification (ID) system, costing about $20 billion to create and hundreds of millions more per year to operate. Even if it were free, the country should reject a national ID system. It would cause law-abiding American citizens to lose more of their privacy as government records about them grew and were converted to untold new purposes. "Mission creep" all but guarantees that the federal government would use an EEV system to extend federal regulatory control over Americans' lives even further.

Source

If you go to the source of this article, you can see the Cato Institute's full report.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I admit that I was on-board completely with e-verify. But this does give reason to pause and re-evaluate it. If the Libertarians say it's not cost effective, then something has to be wrong.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

National ID is ok with me as long as I don't have to carry it daily and it doesn't carry biometrics beyond say a fingerprint.

Btw. This is a very old source...not inferring its invalid...just surprised your posting something so old.

Edited June 16, 2011 by Sousuke

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A compelling argument. It's interesting that at least here on this message board, there aren't any self described Libertarians who aren't also foaming-at-the-mouth, uncompromising, anti-immigrant.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

A compelling argument. It's interesting that at least here on this message board, there aren't any self described Libertarians who aren't also foaming-at-the-mouth, uncompromising, anti-immigrant.

Most libertarians believe in open borders.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Most libertarians believe in open borders.

Yep, but you won't find any of them here on VJ.

[The Dude 206]

LOL, you should go to a libertarian symposium some time. You'll find the borderline anarchists along with the tea-party leaning sorts as well as civil libertarians.

@Sousuke - I posted that research because of the source. The people who would normally dismiss this sort of research out of hand can't ignore the Cato Institute.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

National ID is ok with me as long as I don't have to carry it daily and it doesn't carry biometrics beyond say a fingerprint.

Btw. This is a very old source...not inferring its invalid...just surprised your posting something so old.

3 years? It's not that old. I'd say the issues it describes would surely still have relevance.

E-Verify will work, but you have to spend a great deal of money to make it work.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In the other e-verify thread, the claim is made that e-verify quickly returns eligibility confirmation on 99.5% of eligible workers. Looking at a total workforce of roughly 150MM, brings us to some 750K individuals that may need to have a second look. So, where is this "millions each year would go pleading..." argument coming from? I don't see it as a valid claim. I smell pro-business libertarian bias here - it's that field that wants to ensure that the exploitation of undocumented slaves can continue. E-verify goes against that goal.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

No idea about the lower 48, but here in Alaska I would say by far the majority of company's do electronic back ground checks on all new hires. I'm not sure if that cost more or less than this e-verify, but I can't see there being much difference in cost.

[Darnell 8,478]

ya, it's a 3 year source - but so what ?

it was reported on 3 years ago, meaning that particular topic of EEV has had legs for at least 4 years now.

To be fair, follow the lobbyists who are against it - they've been representing some of the largest illegal alien employees in the USA.

(Holy Crepes, Mr. Big Dog - did we just agree on something? )

Edited June 17, 2011 by Darnell

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

(Holy Crepes, Mr. Big Dog - did we just agree on something? )

It's one of the odd spots I guess. I believe in a country's right to manage immigration to it's benefit. And I believe that we need to put a stop to the exploitation of illegal labor and the hurtful distortion that such illegal labor causes in our labor markets. That distortion hurts those that can afford it least the most.

Edited June 17, 2011 by Mr. Big Dog