A little DU unity. HR4437 poll.

[mdmc]

Poll question: A little DU unity. HR4437 poll.

Peace and low stress!http://www.justiceforimmigrants.org/HR4437.html

[Tom Joad]

1. ??

[mdmc]

2. nice avatar!

:kick:
If you support the HR bill, vote I support HR4437. If you do not support HR4437 vote I DO NOT support HR4437. :shrug:

[Cobalt Violet]

3. I do not. n/t

[Lost-in-FL]

4. I don't know about the HR4437

Please, pardon my ignorance. Is this about making it a Federal Crime to cross illegally?:shrug:

[OKNancy]

5. Major provisions of HR4437

http://www.justiceforimmigrants.org/HR4437.html

Major Provisions of HR 4437
The following is a summary of the major provisions of H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Anti-Terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. The legislation passed the House of Representatives 239-182 on Friday, December 16, 2005.

“Unlawful presence” would now be considered a crime and a felony, meaning that undocumented immigrants may have to serve jail time and would be barred from future legal status and from re-entry into the country.

Immigrants, including asylum-seekers, victims of human trafficking, victims of domestic abuse, and children who are apprehended along an international border or at a port-of-entry would be detained until such time as they are removed from the nation or otherwise provided immigration relief.

Anyone or any organization who “assists” an individual without documentation “to reside in or remain” in the United States knowingly or with “reckless disregard” as to the individual’s legal status would be liable for criminal penalties and five years in prison. This could include church personnel who provide shelter or other basic needs assistance to an undocumented individual. Property used in this act would be subject to seizure and forfeiture.

The use of expedited removal, which would permit DHS enforcement personnel to remove a potential asylum-seeker without providing an opportunity to appear before an immigration judge or qualified adjudicator, would be mandated within 100 miles of the border and within 14 days of a person’s entry into the country.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would be required to erect up to 700 miles of fencing along the Southwest border at points with the highest number of immigrant deaths.

State and local law enforcement are authorized to enforce federal immigration laws. State and local governments which refuse to participate would be subject to the loss of federal funding.

Asylum seekers and refugees who are convicted of a minor offense, such as petty theft, would be barred from permanent legal residence and eventual citizenship.

Document fraud would be considered an aggravated felony and would subject an asylum-seeker to deportation and bars to re-entry.

Nationals from countries who do not accept the return of aliens who commit crimes in this country would not be admitted to the United States. This would include countries such as China, Vietnam, and Cuba.

DHS would be given the authority to continue to detain individuals who have served their sentences based upon a determination that they are a “dangerous alien,” contrary to Supreme Court rulings barring indefinite detention.

The diversity visa lottery program, which allows 50,000 immigrants each year from countries around the world to permanently reside in the United States, is eliminated.

[Lost-in-FL]

6. Thanks for the link!

[Tom Joad]

7. Ok, then, that makes it easy. HELL NO, i do not support that sh*t.

[Lost-in-FL]

8. That is some horrible thing!

This is plain evil. HELL F'NG NO!!!

[Sapphire Blue]

11. **** TAKE ACTION **** Contact your Senators ****

Contact your Senators: http://www.justiceforimmigrants.org/action.html

[mdmc]

15. thanks for the link

:patriot:

[Sapphire Blue]

19. Can you edit your OP to include this & OKNancy's links?

[mdmc]

23. will do

[Ignacio Upton]

24. This bill is wrong for many reasons

I also doubt that it will solve the problem of cheap labor. Treating asylum seakers like is is also horrendous. I also support tightening our borders, but this particular bill is a bad idea for other reasons.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Sounds like something written in the Reichstag circa 1935. I vote NEIN!

[Mythsaje]

10. I was wondering when they'd play the

asset forfeiture card for something else besides drug "crimes."

[im10ashus]

12. I do not!

Thanks for the poll! :hi:

[mdmc]

13. your welcome!

:hi:

[JohnKleeb]

14. Curious is this the Sensenbrenner bill

If thats the case then count me as opposed to it.

[radio4progressives]

25. Yes this is the Sensenbrenner Bill, and I voted FUCK NO! (smile)

:hi: thanks!

[meganmonkey]

16. If this passes, then I am a felon every day.

I do not support this legislation.

It is unfair to put social service providers (or health providers) in this position.

[mdmc]

17. hey now!

your a felon anyway!:)

[meganmonkey]

20. No, just a miss demeanor!!

;)

[Marie26]

22. Me too.

Oh well, maybe I'll meet you in the detention camps? :hi:

[mdmc]

27. soon enough Marie,

soon enough

[Strelnikov_]

18. Do Not. Here Is My Counter-Proposal

This bill will do nothing to address the labor black market. It will simply provide the Government more laws to jail who they want, while the employers who hire undocumented workers, and who would have even more leverage over these workers, are ignored.

It appears to me that (uncontrolled) immigrant labor fills a void that it perpetuates, low wages that make the jobs undesirable due to an oversupply of labor, the classic supply/demand relationship. All the current immigration policy of this country does is create a black market for labor, exploiting those who are here illegally, and driving down the wages and working conditions so for legal residents and immigrants the job is a step backward.

I feel that a well-regulated Guest Worker program will deal with illegal immigration by addressing demand (the employer). It would hopefully stop the exploitation of immigrants and end the flooding of the labor market due to uncontrolled immigration.

Just like the ‘war on drugs’, illegal immigration cannot be reduced by simply militarizing the border and locking up people. On the other hand, we have to do something to protect the ‘victims’ of this policy, the working people of this country who are citizens or here legally.

The key points of the program would be as follows:

- Hiring of guest workers by businesses would be coordinated through workforce development (unemployment) offices. These offices would maintain a set of procedures/surveys to verify a shortage of labor in a classification before guest workers could be hired.

- A wage rates system would have to be maintained to prevent low wages from being used as way to create a labor shortage.

- All labor laws, including minimum wage rates and social security payments, would be enforced for guest workers. After participation in the program over time, the guest worker would be eligible for a retirement SS annuity based on what they paid in.

- Severe penalties for those employers violating the above provisions.

- A worker certification system, also administered by workforce development, to take the burden of verifying an employees legal status off of the employer. If an employer takes the step to verify the employees status though this system, they will be held harmless in the event the employee is found to not have legal standing.

Some thoughts on immigration policy from John Sayles which sums up my feelings on this issue.

John Sayles
From:A People's Democratic Platform

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040802&s=forum

The Democratic platform should call for an end to the hypocrisy of our immigration policy. Our current policy, an enormously expensive cat-and-mouse game, most notably on our southern border, calls on the INS to enforce immigration laws that are openly expected to be ignored by countless US industries and private employers. Some sort of regulated guest-worker program is needed.

Once it is in place, if immigrants continue to enter the country illegally and can't find work, word will filter back and the numbers will decrease dramatically. While in our country, however, those guest workers need to be protected from exploitation--to be assured they will be paid for their work, that their working conditions will meet state and federal safety standards and that they will receive no less than the federally mandated minimum wage (which needs to be raised).

Employers would be required to withhold some percentage (perhaps the equivalent of federal taxes and Social Security) from wages to help defray the costs of the program. Penalties for hiring foreign workers outside of the program would be high enough (and sufficiently enforced) to end the black market in labor that is thriving now.

Protecting all workers in this country is an important first step toward the amendment or abolition of NAFTA and the protection of workers throughout the world.

[mdmc]

21. thanks for the link

interesting thought...

[nonconformist]

26. No. nt

[mdmc]

28. .

[Solly Mack]

29. I do not support it