Capitol Hill Blue Forums Life and Moral Issues Crime & Punishment Illegal Immigration and Appropriate Penalties

I will address ESL...as I have been a tutor for a number of years and am now in a master's program. ESL doesn't exist. To speak of. If ESL was going to be part of a larger program, wouldn't they be creating training programs for ESL teachers? No, they're not. In fact, the training programs that exist are dying like flies. My university has decided not to continue the program. All the professors have gone elsewhere. This program includes certification for existing secondary school teachers. I will have to cobble together the rest of my courses and make my own degree. In all of Florida, I can count on both hands ESL classes for students. And they all use barely trained volunteers. So, forget ESL.

EmmaG

I think that there has to be a staged solution to the problem. The stages would recognize various different objectives and seek to solve the easiest problems first.

I would start with the value that no employer should see hiring an illegal as a good business decision because they can be paid less and the employer need not follow otherwise applicable labor law.

So I would start by announcing that we do intend to solve the problem. The details will be fleshed out in the future. But as of this deadline, employers will be heavily punished for systemically evading applicable labor law concerning hours, safety, overtime, pay, etc. If you clean up your problems now, you will not be responsible for retroactive damages. But, if you continue theses practices after the deadline, then all damages for affected employees will be retroactive for the full term of employment. there will be quintuple damages awarded to the affected employees. Other documented employees will also be eligible for quintuple damages based on the estimated reduction in wages and benefits they suffered. The employer will be liable to law suits from any documented job applicant who feels he did not get a job because of discrimination against legal workers. There will be a large reward offered for all individuals who are tipsters and help identify employers in violation All undocumented workers will have an 3 year immigration amnesty for turning in an employer in violation. CEO/owner of the company along with the top financial officer will be liable for prison time of one week for every employee awarded damages. under this law up to maximum of one year. CEO and chief financial officer will have there tax bracket doubled for one year for every 5 violations that are convicted. All stock and stock options will be forfeited if more than 100 violations are found.

The objective of all of this is to make absolutely positively for sure that no business manager systematically abuse their employees for in order to improve profitability.

Obviously more laws would follow, but this would be a start

The reference in that article to "people living in fear and terror" strikes me as hardly a step forward...

EmmaG, I'm sorry to hear about your program. I know here in the midwest there's a real need for ESL at all levels - grade school, high school, and adult. And I do understand that if you believe the laws are wrong (as I do), talk of penalties - particularly for the current laws - seems pointless.

So I want to back the discussion up one more time, and ask this question - not specifically of EmmaG but of all of us -

Under what circumstances, if any, should employers be permitted to allow undocumented aliens? Illegal immigrants? Whatever you care to call them? I find this a very hard question to answer. They obviously occupy a niche in our economy -- a large one.

Assuming some portion of them remain - because not all 12 million can or will go home - they can't simply be turned out on the streets to starve. Either they have to be allowed to work, or they become wards of the state.

So - under what circumstances should employers be allowed to hire the undocumented?

Phil, somehow we're parsing the same words in different ways apparently...

The argument of yours "There is no reasonable refutation that these workers are indispensable to our economy" is what I am primarily addressing (and disagree with).

I suggested that the 'indispensable to the economy' part is a red herring put forth by those employers who want to keep the status quo, and then you said


And I am not convinced that it is (an economic necessity)!
I gave an example where DOUBLING the current wages (somewhere between $4 and $11 per hour) would have a miniscule effect on our cost of produce, around 2 cents per pound.

Still not enough takers? Double it again! So a pound of tomatoes goes up 6 cents instead of 2 cents... so what? If that's what it takes to break the argument that 'migrant workers that work for sub-minimum wages are needed', than so be it - let the market set the price.

As for 'profitability', that too is a red herring - but to get to why I think it is, first I think their whole argument needs to be broken down into three distinct but related arguments:

1) Low wages are needed because otherwise the economy will suffer;
and
2) Immigrant workers are needed because they will work for lower wages than U.S. workers;
and
3) Illegal immigrant workers are hired because they will work for even lower wages than legal immigrant workers.


From what I've read (and doing the math), the first argument of 'economic necessity' is a red herring - yes, they are 'blowing smoke'! And if that is the case, then all three are false!

And even whether or not that is the case, the 'profitability argument' is itself irrelevant because if everyone followed the law, they would all simply raise their prices and profit would go on as before.

In my opinion, they bring up the first and second points above, hoping that the third point gets lost in the weeds - by getting people to go along with the first two points to 'maintain their profitability' while purportedly doing it as a 'benefit to the consumer' (to stay in business, and keep prices low), they can also increase their profitability from the third point as well.

And that's just wrong.

Finally, in your response to stereoman:

I read Steve's quotated "have to" phrase as being facetious on his part and disingenuous on theirs; if that is what you were also trying to say, than I think we all agree.

Some partys are opposed to amnesty and also seem to be against punishing illegal employers as well, so maybe the electric shocks explained in one of the previous post could be used for both.

It wouldnt be amnesty if the illegal workers got a good shocking each time they they got caught working or periodically thereafter at each step in the process of becoming a citizen.

Shocking the illegal employers would have no direct negative economic effects on them so it seems revenue neutral. I dont see a downside.

Going back to my previous post (yes, my blood pressure was a little high), let me offer one small thing that every literate adult could do today. Find a literacy program in your area and sign up to teach. You don't have to speak another language, and they will give you some training. It will take two hours a week. You can teach English to speakers of other languages, or you can teach an American how to read. If you would do that...and serve as a role model for your family and friends...I believe that many of the problems in our society would in time take care of themselves.

Okay, last rant for now.

EmmaG

Ooh. Sounds like another instance of "starving the beast" to me, Emma. Here at home, I know three ESL teachers. They are overwhelmed by their workload, but at least one of them has reported to me feeling overwhelmed by something else: the outpouring of gratitude from her students. Do you get much of that?

RB, I recall a discussion we had here about the Minimum Wage. Along the way, we examined the experience of States that had raised their minimum wage above the Federal Mandate, and found that the economy had not suffered in those States due to increasing the minimum wage. In fact, in some of those States the economy had improved after the increase.


Indeed.

This discussion is now merging with this one so let's continue the economic portion of the discussion here.

If there are no further comments on the punishment aspect I will close this thread.

Phil Hoskins, moderator

Thanks for the reminder, Phil.

I got so caught up in the replies to my questions, I forgot the actual title of this thread!

So, after being educated by all these great posts, I have to say that I still am not sure what the answer is regarding punishment, other than:

1) Employers who knowingly hire illegal workers should be punished; those who abuse the illegal status of their workers ought to be punished to the degree that all profits from that illegal status are erased, and at least doubled, in terms of fines. Jail time for those that provide illegal documents, or aid in any form of ID theft (as occurred in the Marshalltown Iowa case recently - currently the recruiter is under indictment, AFAIK)

2) The work visa program should be expanded, and people who have weaited the longest should be given priority, along with:

3) Currently illegally working immigrants should be given priority, if they have proven themselves to be model citizens and contribute to the community (children in school, no serious criminal convictions, etc), but there will be penalties, perhaps multiplied by the number of years they have been here, in addition to any income tax owed.

4) All other illegal immigrants need to go back to their home country, and can re-apply for legitimate work visas, at the end of the line.

5) Some kind of immigrant ombudsman office should be established to help applicants navigate the process; perhaps this could be funded by the fines from the (formerly) illegal immigrants that are invited to stay.

Just a few thoughts from someone who is new to the topic, so I'm sure others can improve on them...