If there is one thing that is critical during a budget debate, it is to have hard numbers for associated costs and savings. I also raised concerns on the scope of the language that seems to require a costly immigration screening for something as simple as a person entering the door of a public library. It was clear to me that the amendment had not been properly researched or vetted.
The House voted to send the amendment to study which is a polite way of telling the representative filing the amendment that more work has to be done to understand the bill’s impact before it will be considered. A bill of this magnitude needs to be analyzed for implementation costs and expected savings. It needs to go through a fact-finding public hearing and legal review process. Colorado’s experience shows that the bill is seriously flawed in its current form.
I talk with people every day who are fed up with partisan bickering. I was saddened, but not surprised, when my vote to send this amendment to study was trumpeted as a pro-illegal immigrant vote with little or no consideration given to my comments on the actual content of the amendment and its cost to the taxpayers. Coming up with sound bites is easy but developing sound public policy is a much more difficult and time-consuming process.
Jen Benson
State Representative
37th Middlesex District
www.jenbenson.org
That’s how it is in the real world.
<
p>Illegal Aliens are SCARED TO DEATH of getting busted by authorities and booted out. To think that they would apply for public services is INSANE.
<
p>These people are getting paid in physical cash (Green bills with the national motto printed on back).
<
p>They do not apply for social services or use financial institutions.
<
p>Big business loves using them because they can pay them dirt, and they don’t complain because they are outside of the law.
<
p>Laws like this one would drive up costs. It costs big money to get the infrastructure that we would need to check on this.
<
p>I have another answer.
<
p>The US Congress ought to pass a law saying that all federal, state, and local labor laws, such as minimum wage shall apply to PERSONS, not to CITIZENS.
<
p>That way, they would always have to pay at least the minimum wage.
<
p>But that won’t happen. The GOP business interests want the illegal aliens to work cheap, and then to get the votes of the anti-immigrant natives by saying how they are going to bust the illegal aliens.
<
p>State Rep. Jen Benson DARES to tell the truth about the law and about money to the people, instead of going for sound bites that sound good but spend money that the state doesn’t have for no good.
<
p>If you live in that area, vote for her.
…federal wage laws are already written to not be exclusive to citizens. Legal immigrants on work visas are also entitled to the minimum wage. The reason the laws don’t protect illegal immigrants in practice is because businesses know they have little risk of these employees fighting to get the wage laws enforced on their own behalf.
Rep. Perry should have been able to answer financial questions about a budget amendment. I hope your questioning is as diligent about all items in the budget.
<
p>A couple questions for you:
<
p>(1) I’ve read the text of the amendment, but could not find language that suggested a costly immigration screening for something as simple as a person entering the door of a public library would be required.
<
p>Wouldn’t entering a public library be exempted under this clause:
<
p>
<
p>(2) I have not been able to locate cost analysis of the Colorado statute, or for that matter the Georgia statute on which the CO law was based. I went 5 pages deep in Google. Could you share your source?
<
p>
Could you list what is exempted from verification requirements?
<
p>Cut and past your quote in Google and you’ll get the CO statue as well as Tennessee, Oklahoma, Utah, Maryland and a whole host of other states with similar bills. Seems like Perry filled out a form letter on this one. Seems as though we gave him more credit on drafting this, all he did was slap his name on the top. I wonder if he even read it. Could be why he couldn’t answer the simplest of questions.
We should thank Rep. Benson, Rep. Katherine Clark, and any other representatives who said no to this stupidity.
True indeed.
<
p>Getting an accurate estimate of the costs is all you can ever do. And it’s not that hard. If Rep. Perry could find some credible source that would be great, and he could argue it is a worthy investment and important for our public agencies to develop and implement a process to examine and verify every applicants’ status in a way that would stand up to the inevitable legal challenges.
Let’s Take Just One Example of How This Would Work
<
p>Let’s say you are a U.S. citizen. You have just lost your job joined the 9.2 percent of the state workforce who is unemployed.
<
p>There are lots of safeguards already in place to make sure that immigrants without work authorization are not permitted to work.
<
p>For example, when you started your job, your employer was required to verify your employment status.
<
p>Under both state and federal law, including subsection (h) of this state law, noncitizens without work authorization are ineligible for unemployment insurance.
<
p>Any application for unemployment insurance that has identification other than a Social Security Number (such as an A-number) is automatically checked through the federal SAVE system.
<
p>Also, the state unemployment agency has a Program Integrity Department that continously receives nationwide cross-checks of earnings reports, Social Security Numbers and other information, preventing unemployment compensation payments to persons without work authorization.
<
p>So, now, you can go to an unemployment agency office or apply for unemployment insurance over the telephone. As the agency says, the process can take 3 to 4 weeks even if there are no problems.
<
p>And with the number of claims during this recession, there are plenty of problems.
<
p>Now, imagine if the amendment is the law.
<
p>The unemployment agency no longer can accept applications over the phone. You and the 7000 other unemployed people who are applying for unemployment insurance every month have to go to an office in person and present your driver’s license. The state agency has to change its procedures in order to keep a record of your visit.
<
p>How many weeks do you think it will take to get your check now? Was it worth it?
I bet that the ones behind this bill also want to “log-jam” the unemployment system so that fewer people will collect unemployment. Maybe the savings from unemployment will pay for the implementation of the new system required by the law.
<
p>Is it right to take money that could help desperate people and use it to create more red tape? No.
<
p>Would many politicians do it for political advantage? ABSOLUTELY.
I bet that the ones behind this bill also want to “log-jam” the unemployment system so that fewer people will collect unemployment.
<
p>I doubt the people behind this even thought that far. The whole Benson kerfuffle seems nothing more than a nativist dog whistle to all the tea party types in the 37th District, which voted overwhelmingly for Scott Brown.