Syndicated columnist Ruben Navarette takes Romney to task for hypocrisy and opportunism in his recent ads targeting illegal immigration and sanctuary cities.
Reasonable people should wait for the facts to come out before jumping to conclusions — or trying to score political points.
Republican Mitt Romney, who must be getting desperate since he can’t get beyond 15 percent in national polls, is using the case [of Jose Carranza] to bludgeon Rudy Guiliani. The Romney campaign is running a radio ad blasting “cities like Newark, San Francisco and New York City that adopt sanctuary policies” and become “magnets that encourage illegal immigration.”
A few paragraphs doesn’t do it justice. Read the whole thing here.
Please share widely!
When the stupid sanctuary city thing came up at MY town meeting, it was voted down. When it came up in Orleans, it was passed (btw – people there are trying to get a warrant article to repeal it). Can Romney take CREDIT for the 13 towns in Barnstable County where the petition was offered and FAILED to pass? Does that indicate his persuaviveness?
<
p>
As Governor, as you well know Eury, Romney had no say over the internal policies of cities and towns. As it happens, he DID speak against it, but no media could be bothered to publish the story. You may remember that he negotiated the ICE agreement with the Feds that Deval trashed – to allow those under arrest for crimes to be held and deported. Now, the local police get to play catch and release.
<
p>
Rudy, on the other hand, had DIRECT and IMMEDIATE control over the policy of his own administration – not the Feds, not the State, but his own city. He chose not to act. In fact, he openly supported the policy while he was Mayor. If that’s his opinion, fine, but he should own up to it.
<
p>
And the landscaper? He had a contract with a legal firm. That firm was responsible for ascertaining the status of its employees. WHAT would you have said if Romney dragged some Cape Verdean guy, born in Billarica, off and demanded to see his ‘papers’? Or had refused to hire a firm because its personnel seemed a little too ‘brown’? Racism! Oppression! Falling Skies!
<
p>
Hypocricy, indeed !
I don’t know how Romney can defend the border if he can’t keep the illegals off his lawn.
…if Mittens is so concerned about illegal immigration, it seems that he would have ensured that any firm that he hired to do his lawn care would have only hired legal immigrants.
<
p>
The fact that he didn’t take that extra step to ensure that the firms that he hires only hire legal aliens surely indicates that he isn’t particularly interested in illegal immigration–except when it comes to pandering for election votes.
<
p>
Is that succinct enough for you?
<
p>
BTW, does Staples, the company that made his employer Bain rich, only engage with firms that hire legal aliens? I doubt it.
<
p>
/sarcasm
Hey! Who made them shoes you’re wearing?
…apparently it has escaped your notice that I have not been beating the bushes against “illegal” immigration. Mittens has–for votes, of course.
<
p>
And Mittens was perfectly capable of ensuring that the firms that he and his employer Bain hired, only hired legal aliens.
<
p>
Don’t try to mischaracterize my comment.
HOW?
<
p>
You cannot get the social security numbers of the subcontractors and employees of a firm you hire. It violates privacy and identity theft laws to MAKE such a request!
<
p>
Without the individual names, dates of birth, and SS # of the various individuals, how can YOU – personally – make such a verification?
<
p>
Would you want your personal information handed out to every person – legit or not – who is a customer of your employer?
<
p>
Since it is against the law to employ illegal immpgrants, every employer is required by the state and Federal government to obtain ORIGINAL documents for their verification purposes. The last time I changed jobs, I had to provide ORIGINAL birth and marriage certificates – to my employer, not for mass distribution.
<
p>
Unless you are willing to provide such information about yourself on a wholesale basis, you are either a hypocrite or willfully dense.
…or what a W-4 IRS form is.
<
p>
It isn’t that difficult, if you are really interested in finding out the immigration status of the employees of your contractors.
<
p>
Which, of course, Mittens was not. Blather on.
They were fraudulent.
<
p>
THAT’S your idea of verification? And again, CUSTOMERS do not have access to W-4 forms – EMPLOYERS do. I know because I hire people!
<
p>
Blather on.
And again, CUSTOMERS do not have access to W-4 forms – EMPLOYERS do.
<
p>
Customers who are concerned about illegal immigration can demand access to the IRS records regarding W-4s, and IRS verification (to the employers) that the W-4s were all in order.
<
p>
Obviously, Mittens wasn’t interested in doing that. I’m not either, but I’m not running anything bashing illegal immigrants. Unlike Mittens.
<
p>
A W-4 form is merely an instruction to your employer as to the rate at which you wish to have withholding made – single, married, dependents, and so on. It HAS no citizenship information, and is in fact merely a signed indication that you wish to have taxes withheld.
<
p>
And because it contains confidential information, it IS considered a confidential document.
<
p>
Blather on.
First, nobody said anything about citizenship information. Of course a W-4 will not have citizenship information, because people who are not citizens, but who hold work permits, will also fill out W-4s when they seek employment. Don’t try to change the subject.
<
p>
W-4s are filed with the IRS, because they are used to determine the employer’s tax withholding obligation. A W-4 includes the name of the withholdee, and a social security number. It is an easy matter to cross-match name (and address) and SS number, to determine whether the information that has been provided is that of someone whose name is that associated with a valid SS number. It’s not a foolproof system (nothing ever is), but the IRS, if it wanted to (but obviously doesn’t) could kick false matches back up to the prospective employer.
<
p>
Now, getting back to Romney, which is the real issue, did he even ask his lawn care company for documentation ensuring that all of their employees had been approved by the IRS? Probably not. And, as far as I’m concerned, if he did not do that, that would suggest that he is more than a bit of a hypocrite on the immigration issue.
<
p>
BTW, your little insert regarding the W-4 instructions is cute, but there is nothing preventing a prospective employer (Romney) from demanding information from the prospective company. He couldn’t get it from the IRS, but he could get it from the company. Don’t try to BS us.
…in your defense of Mittens, is that Mittens has been beating on the “illegal immigration” issue for–what has it been? months, if not years. AND he has had the ability to minimize the likelihood that the companies that he engages do not hire “illegals.” AND FURTHER, he had failed to do so.
<
p>
I don’t how to put it more succinctly than that. It would cost a fortune for me to come over from Germany to beat you over the head to get it through your obviously thick skull.
<
p>
Your comment is about as stupid as the comment by Wal-Mart when it was discovered that one of their cleaning crew contractors was hiring “illegals.” What the Wal-Mart spokesperson basically said was “well, we didn’t know.” And they didn’t care one way or the other.
<
p>
But, as far as I can tell, Wal-Mart doesn’t go out and make political pronouncements about “illegal” immigration. Mittens Romney does.
Like I said before, customer, who made them shoes you’re wearing?
<
p>
WAL-MART is an EMPLOYER. Romney was a CUSTOMER. All the pounding you do with Black Forest sticks cannot change that essential fact.
…when a customer engages a firm to do work for him or her, the customer can demand anything whatsoever regarding the workers who are going to perform the work. It is not required that the firm provide the documentation, but that is not the issue in Mitten’s situation. The issue in Mitten’s situation is did he request documentation regarding the immigration status of the employees who were going to be working on his lawn (or other peoples’ lawns) before he engaged the company?
<
p>
If he did not do that, then his incessant bleating about illegal aliens is hypocrisy. I could put a bit more crudely about the topic, as in, he really didn’t give a (horse’s manure) but I’ll refrain.
<
p>
Now, did that put it succinctly enough for you?
Or do they do that in Germany? That Teutonic authority things and all?
<
p>
Since it is prima facia illegal to employ illegal immigrants, what other documentation should he request from his vendor? That there are no tax evaders employed by the company either?
Customers who are concerned about illegal immigration can demand access to the IRS records regarding W-4s, and IRS verification (to the employers) that the W-4s were all in order.
Seriously, think about it. Walk into your nearest convenience store and demand copies of the store’s W-4 and see how far you get.
<
p>
i as a peon may or may not get it. but if i was GOVERNOR, i’d sure as hell be provided with what i legally requested. if i wasn’t, if i cared i’d be suspicious as to the legality of the company i was hiring. if i was serious about the issue, i’d bother to probe further.
<
p>
you know, it’s not like it is a secret that lawn services are primarily carried out by undocumented migrants.
<
p>
you know as well as i do (and PP, in an honest moment) that much of the big business community does not actually want the cheap undocumented labor to go away. that would cut into their profits. so people like willard pay lip service to “immigrant problems”, when in reality they’re tickled pink over the who state of affairs. open the flood gates! only people seeking dirt wages need apply! more profits for me me me!!!!!!!! to pave my way to pennsylvania avenue!
<
p>
You’d make sure–as Governor–that you received confidential information that no other person could legally obtain? Do tell.
<
p>
“Hi! I’m the Governor. I’d like your employees’ W-4 records with social security number. Trust me.”
<
p>
Yes, Peter, I am well aware that the Governor does not control municipal governments. However, I do not recall (and maybe I’ve just blocked it out) our esteemed former Governor-in-absentia spending a lot of time or political will addressing the issue while occupying the corner office.
<
p>
Romney has a solid history of positioning himself directly in line with whichever direction the wind is blowing (abortion, guns, gays), and immigration is just another issue that fits the pattern. I honestly don’t think he cares too much about it, but the Red State voters do, so he’ll use it as well as the next guy.
<
p>
At least when it comes from Thompson and Huckabee I believe they mean it.
As it happens, there was a lot of talk about illegal immigration during the 10 months or so that the ICE agreement was being negotiated with the Feds. A lot of it centered around roofers, tradesmen, etc., getting underbid by firms that employed illegal immigrants and who failed to pay insurance and minimum wage.
<
p>
How do you think the Globe got the idea for the story in the FIRST place – just blind, shoeleather reporting? They couldn’t be bothered to report what was said, but instead began to try to find a ‘gotcha’ angle.
<
p>
As far as Romney’s responsibility to personally vet these subs, the State Police detail which guarded him had done so and were satisfied. Admittedly, they didn’t follow the worker home to Guatemala like the Globe.
Gary and Ms. Porc seriously do not understand the issue that I was raising. If Mittens Romney is considering contracting with a lawn care firm, I can demand to see any information that the firm has that may give light to the immigration status of their employees. The firm is not required to give it to Mittens, but, if the firm does not give it to him, he is not oblged to contract with that firm.
<
p>
Succinctly state, the real issue is, did Mittens ask for the information before he contracted with the firm. And the reason that that is the real issue is that Mittens has been beating on the illegal immigration issue for a long time.
<
p>
As an analogy to my comment in the first paragraph, if a prime contractor bids a federal contract that requires security clearances, the prime contractor is virtually obligated to esnsure that its proposed sub-contractors’ employees security clearances are in order. Where does the prime get the information from? The sub, of course. If the sub doesn’t provide the information, the prime won’t deal with it. That is directly analogous to Mitten’s situation. It is obvious that he is not really interested in illegal immigration; he just wants to beat on it to pander to a particular segment of the electorate.
I had hope that by providing actual information from the IRS – see below –
<
p>
<
p>
– that I could help raj out of his obdurate density about this matter.
<
p>
<
p>
But Romney was NOT an employer, he was a customer. The owner of the landscaping firm was the employer. The IRS says EVERY employer must treat confidential information like dates of birth and social security numbers according to statue. So, no grass cutting firm could be contracted. They may not be shared with an inquisitive customer base, which may contain identity thieves. For raj to claim that Romney as Governor has special powers to require information that it is against the law to share merely indicates to me that he has stayed too long in Germany, possibly associating with gentlemen in jodhpurs and shiny black boots, demanding ‘PAY-perrrsss’ with a hiss as their teeth clench their cigaretes. Or – that he has never in his life met a payroll and has zero idea of what an employer’s acutal legal responsibilities are.
<
p>
BTW – I am able to refrain from calling Democrat (go ahead, David – GIVE me a zero for using the forbidden form! You permits LOTS of other leeway!) candidates Shillary or NObama. I note that the Democrats are unable to remain polite while arguing.