Free In Idaho!

I’ve been out scouting and checking the last couple weeks… duck season begins this weekend, and pheasant starts next weekend.  I can hardly wait.  (this photo is an early morning cell phone shot from last weekend - while the good camera was in San Francisco with my sweetie)

Yesterday, a San Francisco Judge blocked the Bush Administration from trying to follow through with tougher enforcement of immigration laws (as demanded by the American people this summer) by sending “no match” letters to many of the nation’s largest employers.

A federal judge barred the Bush administration yesterday from launching a planned crackdown on U.S. companies that employ illegal immigrants, warning of its potentially “staggering” impact on law-abiding workers and companies.

In a firm rebuke of the White House, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer of San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction against the president’s plan to press employers to fire as many as 8.7 million workers with suspect Social Security numbers, starting this fall.

President Bush made the effort the centerpiece of a re-energized enforcement drive against illegal immigration in August after the Senate rejected his proposal to overhaul immigration laws.

The coalition of groups that brought this legal action is very revealing, and a bit surprising because of the strange bedfellows.  One of the weaknesses some on the Right display is a blind allegiance at times to an amoral marketplace.  Only trouble is, many of the human beings in the marketplace are afflicted, not with an overwhelming desire to help their fellow man, but with an overwhelming desire to stuff their own pockets, even at the expense of breaking the law.

…the court ruling — sought by major American labor, business and farm organizations — highlighted the chasm that the issue has opened between the Republican Party and its traditional business allies.

In a 22-page ruling, Breyer said the plaintiffs — an unusual coalition that included the AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — had raised serious questions about the legality of the administration’s plan to mail Social Security “no-match” letters to 140,000 U.S. employers.

Unions, the ACLU, and the Chamber of Commerce…Again, I am reminded of one of the chief arguments against the abolishment of slavery, that doing so would ruin the economy of the South.  Bogus horse poop!  “Questions about the legality” of sending “no-match” letters?  What is illegal about telling an employer an employee’s numbers don’t match?  You need a Social Security number to get a driver’s license, to get a paycheck, and to pay taxes.  If there is something that doesn’t match about an employer’s number, it is a simple thing to get it fixed.  Ask any married woman in America (who must contact the SSA when their names change).  The burden is NOT on the employer, it is on the employee.  And, it is the law.

..The scope of the problem is uncontested. A three-year government audit ending in 2001 found “widespread” misuse of Social Security numbers by illegal immigrants, who often present fake or fraudulent documents to obtain jobs. Overall, 7.2 million illegal immigrants account for at least 10 percent of low-skilled U.S. workers and 5 percent of the total U.S. workforce, according to a Pew Hispanic Center analysis of 2005 census data.

Illegal immigrants make up even greater portions of workers in specific industries, including 24 percent in farming, 17 percent in cleaning, 14 percent in construction and 12 percent in food preparation. But the government’s record in developing tools to screen such workers is spotty, largely because of successful efforts by employers, labor unions and civil rights groups to water them down.

Not to mention the complicity of politicians like el Presidente Bush, and Senator Hall of Fame.

…”There can be no doubt that the effects of the rule’s implementation will be severe,” Breyer wrote, resulting in “irreparable harm to innocent workers and employers.”

Innocent workers and employers?  No, it is illegal to sneak in this country and work with phoney papers.  No, it is illegal to hire people you know are breaking the law.  I’m sorry judge, but you are terribly wrong, and this is the kind of activist judicial BS that makes our blood boil.  Enforcing the law doesn’t harm law abiding folks.  No, this is about cheap labor, slave labor, if you will.  And it is about employers making profits at the expense of the poor folks coming here illegally, as well as at the expense of the American people.  Do you remember any big outcry last year, when the government sent out nearly 140,000 letters to employers?  No, because token enforcement made everyone feel good.  But the demand for real enforcement is causing an uproar this year, and it is flushing out just who believes what, and the reality is not only disappointing, it is disturbing.  There are too many politicians and businessmen willing to sell out their constituents, their companies, their fellow citizens, the legal system and the security of this country in order to maximize and secure their own profits.

By the way, this is a Clinton appointed judge.  Pay attention people.  This next election is about so much more than baby bonds, changing positions, or a candidate’s religion.