De Facto Amnesty: Amnesty Proponents Now Coming Out Against E-Verify


The big sales pitch for amnesty was that we already had “De Facto Amnesty” because we weren’t enforcing the law, so to fix that they would finally begin enforcing the law, securing the borders and ending employment as a magnet for illegal aliens… after a SuperAmnesty of legalizing 12 million illegal aliens.

Then legalization cut in line ahead of border security. McCain declared that we don’t need 20,000 border security agents, just “technology” and a path to citizenship.

And the Wall Street Journal has a high-profile editorial from a Cato Institute person attacking E-Verify. He spends paragraph after paragraph warning about how intrusive E-Verify is, which like most government programs, it certainly is. But like the drug war and gang association laws, it’s needed because politicians refuse to provide border and immigration security and instead manage the symptoms.

“Every tyranny silences opponents by controlling their ability to earn a living. How is it that so many supposedly freedom-loving, small-government Republicans want to arm our nation’s politicized bureaucracy—fresh from the scandals at the IRS and elsewhere—with the power to do just that? Why are we so afraid of immigrants that we would jeopardize this most basic guarantee of our political liberties?” Cochrane writes.

It’s a cynical argument because we have a politicized leftist bureaucracy thanks to an inflow of immigrants carefully selected, in both legal and illegal forms, to bulk up the liberal state.

It’s why the libertarian amnesty argument is really a suicide pact.

You can’t have freedom or small government and open borders. And Cato and other pro-amnesty libertarians seem completely unwilling to deal with that.

“Many opponents of immigration worry that immigrants will overuse expensive social services. The fear is misplaced. The Congressional Budget Office estimates more than $100 billion of net fiscal benefit from the limited expansion of immigration that’s allowed by the Senate bill,” Cochrane writes.

The CBO analysis falls apart once we look past the benefits wall. Push it forward 20-30 years and the picture changes dramatically. And that’s even assuming that the wall holds. I don’t believe it will. No one who follows Obama Inc.’s track records believes that.

There is no net fiscal benefit from dumping 12 million low-skilled crime-prone people during a time of high unemployment who find ways to collect benefits even now when they are officially illegal.

There is a giant net loss.

Perhaps some Republicans worry that immigrants will vote Democratic. But then limiting entrepreneurs and workers makes even less sense. These Republicans should have confidence that their ideas on freedom will attract ambitious, hard-working migrants.

Worry? They will vote Democrat. They do vote Democrat. But who are you going to believe, wishful thinking or your lying eyes?

If Republican ideas have yet to attract legal Mexican immigrants in any great number, what exactly is Cochrane’s basis for believing that ideas about not receiving social benefits because it makes the country fiscally healthier will attract 12 million illegal aliens to vote for Paul Ryan?

Others say they want to protect the wages of American workers. Like all protectionism, that is demonstrably ineffective. Migrants come for jobs Americans won’t or can’t do, and businesses build factories abroad if workers can’t come here.

The Senate bill promises higher caps for “guest workers.” Ponder what “guest worker” really means. Come to America, pick our vegetables, clean our bathrooms and tend our gardens at the invitation of a powerful employer. Pay taxes. And when your visa runs out, go back where you came from—there is no place for you here. This is how Middle East sheikdoms treat Filipino maids and Palestinian construction workers. Is this America?

Why not?

I presume Cochrane would like to trash most protections for American workers so that foreign workers can move here. Is reducing a large portion of America to unsubsidized poverty so that Mexicans can earn 2 dollars an hour really more American than a guest worker program?

And that too isn’t on the table.

We can try to work with American workers or we can give up and flood the country with permanent Democratic voters for a permanent D majority.

Those are the only two options on the table.

In the current vision of immigration reform, millions will still be trying to sneak in, and millions more will remain here working illegally. E-Verify and the border security wall prove it.

So we have an argument for the futility of amnesty. Cochrane concedes it. But his alternative to SuperAmnesty is SuperDuperAmnesty.

 If people could work legally, there would be no need for a system that endangers everyone’s liberty to “verify” them.

People can work here legally. What Cochrane means is that we should dismantle any barriers, including borders and immigration laws, to do that.

And that is to say that America shouldn’t be a country, it shouldn’t be a people, but some sort of free trade zone, full of the world’s workers willing to work for the least.

And once this has been accomplished, some way needs to be found to keep them from voting themselves free money. Oh it’s called a guest worker program. And those don’t work either. Just ask Germany.

Here is the crucial question for genuine immigration reform: How do we respond when someone says, I have heard of your freedom. I am tired of the corrupt police in my country, the bought-off courts, the oppression of rulers, the tyranny of the religious or ethnic majority. I want to join the one country on earth defined by an idea, not by conquest, religion or ethnic identity. No, I don’t have a special skill or a strong back useful to your politically connected employers. I want to come, drive a cab, open a convenience store in a poor neighborhood, work long hours, pay taxes, send my children to school and, eventually, vote.

That’s a nice story. Here’s a more realistic one.

How does Cochrane respond when someone says, “My country is corrupt and poor because of American oppression. I have heard your country is rich. I despise it, but I want to come and live here in my own enclave where I will speak my language and not learn yours, where I will support those of your politicians who promise to give me everything for free, and then I will support those of the left who turn it into the same wreck as the country I came from.”

“I will work at any job, but I will report as little of my income as possible, cheating the government at every turn, while collecting maximum benefits. I will fake divorce my wife. I will bring in family members to work below minimum wage, not report their income and put them on benefits as well, undercutting American businesses while using their tax money to subsidize my little crime family.”

“My sons will be directionless, trapped between two worlds, turning to crime. Also some of my sons may end up blowing up a few of your buildings in the name of the theocracy I came from.”

  • magyart

    The only reason we need E-Verify, is the federal govt. refuses to enforce immigration laws. Enforce present laws and the need for E-Verify evaporates.

    • donny1020

      We need E-verify because employers have shown their inability to comply with Federal immigration laws.The only reason not to require E-verify is so employers can continue to employ and exploit undocumented labor.

      An employer simply has to say now is that he was tricked by a guy with a sixth grade education who can’t speak English and he gets off without any penalty.. All I have to say about that is that the American business owner must be the stupidest group of people on Earth to continually get tricked by undocumented workers.

      Implement E-verify and require that all employees including existing employees be subject to it and start putting employers in prison for recruiting and exploiting undocumented workers and this immigration issue will go away.

  • cynthia curran

    Well, most politicians on both the left and right do not like e-verify.

    • donny1020

      It is the Republican Party who has blocked every attempt to have meaningful action taken against employers who hire and exploit undocumented workers. If we utilize E-verify employers will no longer be able to give the excuse that they were somehow tricked by a Mexican national with a sixth grade education who can’t speak English. This excuse has always been ludicrous in the first place and the Republican Party knows that the entire immigration issue was created by business and continues to be an issue because of business is addicted to a cheap and compliant labor force.

  • cynthia curran

    I presume Cochrane would like to trash most protections for American workers so that foreign workers can move here. Is reducing a large portion of America to unsubsidized poverty so that Mexicans can earn 2 dollars an hour really more American than a guest worker program?You can’t have freedom or small government and open borders. And Cato and other pro-amnesty libertarians seem completely unwilling to deal with that.

    On the Republican side, the Bush family, Dan Quayle and David Dewhurst the LT governor of Texas attack Fair and numbers USA name a poltician out there almost supports some guest worker scheme.

  • Erudite Mavin

    The loudest mouth against E verify is Rand Paul.
    then again, Rand said we will have 12 million new tax payers.
    His father ron when in congress voted over the years against the border fence,
    another loud mouth against border security

  • herb benty

    Why would Obama allow millions of illegals to flood a financially straped America, and at the same time not allow them to be questioned or deported. Europe has allowed this exact scenario, only their mass imigration is muslim and we read and see on TV how well THAT has worked out. Anyone complaining loud enough is arrested. Obama is copying Europe. These one world government idiots will do anything to bring this about, even bankrupting us to accomplish it. If youreally think about it, Obama is a bonafide TRAITOR.

    • Pale Rider

      May I respectfully remind you that one has to be an American citizen to be a traitor.
      Still, I get your point!

      • herb benty

        Really starting to wonder about that, citizen suspicion thing too, as Obama always seems to make decisions that seem to please someone else. Godspeed son.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Actually, they got it ass backwards. Instead of border security first, they should crack down on the employers that hire them. That way if illegals can’t work, they can’t earn money, and without money they can’t buy food and services and survive in America. Thus, they would have no other choice but to self-deport.

    Not to mention that we don’t need border security to stop terrorists from entering the country because we don’t have a terrorist problem. Instead, we have a jihad problem, as jihad, in stark contrast to terrorism, is holy fighting in the cause of Allah for the establishment of Islam and manifests, also in stark contrast to terrorism, via violent and non-violent means, but astronomically far more via non-violent means relative to violent means. Meanwhile, our unhinged and mentally incompetent politicians have already let millions of jihadists in right through the front door, and those jihadists fully intend to impose Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law, on us one of these days.

  • SoCalMike

    Stone false prophets and spit on career parasites.
    Are you listening, Rand Paul?
    Im sick and tired of your sqeemish sell out crap feeding left wing impulses and satisfying their sensibilities.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    ““Every tyranny silences opponents by controlling their ability to earn a living. How is it that so many supposedly freedom-loving, small-government Republicans want to arm our nation’s politicized bureaucracy—fresh from the scandals at the IRS and elsewhere—with the power to do just that? Why are we so afraid of immigrants that we would jeopardize this most basic guarantee of our political liberties?” Cochrane writes.”

    Because they broke our laws already and simply deporting them is just too harsh for the crypto communists. So we compromise already with a form of probation where they still get to leach off of our resources even before they prove themselves…but that’s tyranny? Because we want to make sure they’re lawbreaking ways are in the past?

    So probation is tyranny?

    It’s ironic how these crypto-communists hate laws until they get to write them all. Then I’m a traitor for objecting to anything, or guilty of hate speech for questioning them.

    So, the tyrants are who?

  • SoCalMike

    Dont make me run against you.
    You will lose!

  • objectivefactsmatter

    Why should we trust politicians to write new laws to fix laws they refuse to enforce? The root problem is enforcement. And you see where compromise gets you. Compromise with he crypto-communists of the left is like compromising with jihadis. You get nothing in return except for a more highly motivated enemy of freedom.

    We must be the stupidest of all the free people in world history.

  • David Farrar

    Nobody, especially, Republicans is against legal immigration, except possibly the unions.

    But the only message I have heard from everybody around me is STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!

    ex animo

    • donny1020

      Too bad you don’t know what the policy towards labor as a commodity is within the Republican party. The bosses of the Republican Party have published materials and have adopted the premise that labor is a global commodity and should be treated as such.

      If the owner of a manufacturing operation can offshore his factory to take advantage of the global labor market they believe business owners who choose to stay in America should also have unrestricted access and pricing within the global labor market structure.

      So yes the Republican are for immigration, they just want there to be an excess of blue collar labor and they want to be able to bring labor from where ever it is the least expensive. They also want these workers tied to a single employer and that these workers be exempt from all regulations. They also want to force the American blue collar worker to lower their expectations to meet those of their third world counterparts.

      • laloesch

        And the Democrats aren’t? Or is they’re cause more noble because they only want the votes, permenant power and diversity?

        Both parties are guilty. The Democrats want permanent power and don’t care who gets run over in the process to get it. Legalizing 20 million illegal aliens (the actual number), will give them a HUGE voting majority and ensure victory after victory after victory in local, state and federal elections. They don’t care that legalizing so many non US citizens and the flood that will insue into this country after the amnesty is announced will mean that 20 million unemployed Americans from this last recesssion will NEVER find another decent paying job again, because the huge influx of cheap labor will torpedo our standard of living and current wages.

        They don’t care that a flood of illegals will sink the states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, etc. with debt and a humanitarian crisis when all these people apply for public assistance but can’t communicate with anyone because they only speak spanish, pop kids out left and right and only have basic education skils.
        All this for votes. Democrats are intent on one thing, destroy the Republican party and dam anyone with a white skin in this country.

  • donny1020

    Lets get something very clear. 90% of the money behind eliminating any requirement that employers utilise E-verify comes from the business community. Lobby groups like the Chamber of Commerace and the rabidly anti-union Associated Builders and Contractors of America have long opposed any mandate that their members utilize E-verify. They pump tremendous amounts of money into the Republican machine to ensure their members continue to have unrestricted access to cheap labor. They want the access to the global labor market, they see labor as a commodity like any other commodity.

    As far as amnesty, what about the fact that the real bennificiers of amnesty are employers and developers that use and exploit undocumented workers and religate the American blue collar worker to the scrap pile.

  • donny1020

    That is correct, start putting employers in prison and this immigration issue will be over. Employers recruit, transport and employ these folks, employers pay them substandard wages to undercut American blue collar workers. The Employers, the Chamber of Commerce and the Associated Builders and Contractors of America are the folks who are really to blame here.