Thursday, November 19, 2009

ICE Has Changed Strategy Under the Obama Administration

With Comprehensive Immigration Reform next on the National Agenda, it is important to understand how ICE has changed its strategy under the Obama Administration:
1. Target Felonious Criminals instead of Workers
2. Rigorously target Exploitive Employers to stop them from establishing and maintaining exploitive worksites, thereby eliminating the need for inhumane workplace ICE Raids and costly, inhumane detention centers.
3. Reward Employers for using e-verify.

These changes have been effective in enforcement, reducing crime, increasing safety, while being humane. We can expect more of the same with any Immigration Reform legislation under the Obama administration.

1. Targeting Felonious Criminals:
SEATTLE — Deportations of illegal immigrants with criminal records from Alaska, Oregon, and Washington this past year spiked by nearly 40 percent, while overall removals dropped for the first time in five years, according to new data released by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The data, from October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009, shows that 10,793 people were deported from the Pacific Northwest, a drop of 117 compared to the previous year.
That marks the first time in the last five years that deportations from the Northwest have dropped. Deportations had increased from more than 4,000 in 2005 to nearly 11,000 in 2008.
But removals of people with criminal records went from more than 3,100 to nearly 4,500 between 2008 and 2009 — a jump of 39.7 percent. Since 2005, criminal removals have more than doubled.The data "illustrates pretty vividly the priority we're placing on the removal of criminal aliens," ICE spokeswoman Lorie Dankers said. "We believe it's the best way to enhance public safety."

2. Targeting Exploitive Employers
WASHINGTON — Immigration enforcement officials said Thursday that they were expanding a program for auditing companies that hired and exploited illegal immigrants and had notified 1,000 companies this week that they would have to undergo such a review. John Morton, who heads Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE, announced the new initiative, saying it was part of the administration’s plan to deal with companies that hire illegal workers. “ICE is focused on finding and penalizing employers who believe they can unfairly get ahead by cultivating illegal workplaces,” Mr. Morton said.

3. Reward Use of E-Verify
Janet Napolitano, the secretary of Homeland Security, urged American consumers to favor companies that make efforts to ensure that they do not hire illegal immigrants. To that end, Ms. Napolitano said that her department was permitting companies that use a new computerized system to check the legal status of employees to feature a special logo on their products and ads saying “I E-Verify.”The E-Verify campaign allows employers to match a prospective candidate’s name against a database that combines several government lists, including Social Security, passport and border information. The first audit conducted by ICE covered 654 companies and resulted in the filing of formal notices to seek a fine from 61. ICE officials said they were considering seeking fines from an additional 267 companies from that first audit. An audit consists of ICE officials checking each worker’s Employee Eligibility Verification Form, known as an I-9, to determine what steps were taken to confirm the person was eligible to be hired. If irregularities are found, the companies may then be fined for lax monitoring. The strategy is part of the Obama administration’s effort to reduce illegal immigration by forcing companies to fire unauthorized workers rather than by conducting raids at the workplace, actions that are often accompanied by great personal trauma, including deportation and the dividing of immigrant families.


Anonymous said...

So now you are "pro" E-verify?

MMPete said...

1. The raids have continued under the Obama administration. Both the employers and the employees should be suffer the consquences of breaking our laws. To punish one without the other wouldn't be justice. To lock up a rapist while allowing thieves to roam our country doesn't make any sense regardless of which is the more serious crime.

2. Good, the employers do need to be audited and fined and their illegal employees removed from their workforce and held accountable for their end of this wrongdoing.

3. Now you're ok with E-Verify? I thought your side was opposed to it because it would take care of the two guilty parties and you only want the employers punished?
What's the difference if a workplace is raided or E-Verify is implemented? In both cases the employer and employee will be held accountable by being fined/jailed, detained and deported. I see nothing inhumane in enforcing our immigration laws with either method. The results are the same.

ultima said...

Napo has it in her power to implement E-verify across the board for all employers and employees. Why diddle with a useless reward for the 169,000 who voluntarily use E-verify when there are 8 million who don't. It's less than a half a loaf and she knows it. You can fools some of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

MMPete said...

Off topic because I don't know where else to ask this question, but I just noticed the picture you have on your main page of two children that appear to be Latino and Asian and your caption underneath "something the anti's refuse to understand". What the heck does that mean?

Are you claiming that just because anti's object to illegal immigration that they are also claiming that only white and black children are America citizens? Please explain because that truly is bizarrre.

White nationalists might claim that but certainly not the anti-illegal immigration movement. What kind of a statement were you trying to make there? I don't get it.

Dee said...

Anon & Pete,

Where did I say I was in agreement? I said this is ICE's new strategy under the Obama Administration.

Where I most agree is the transition from targeting workers to instead targeting felonious criminals.

I also agree that exploitive employers MUST BE STOPPED and Punished to the fullest penalty of the law.

I am not opposed to eVerify. I agree to its use, along with drug screening upon employment. I am opposed to mandating eVerify's use in its current flawed state.

Dee said...


re: Latino children - What ANTIs refuse to understand.

You missed the most important part of the message. "I AM an American!" The ANTIs constantly moan and groan that Latino children are "Anchor Babies." I call that CRAP!!! with a capital "C". They are CITIZENS!!! And they will NEVER NOT be citizens. Stop calling Latino babies by that despicable name!!

MMPete said...

E-verify is not flawed. It is over 98% accurate. Do you know anything that is 100% foolproof? I don't.

I don't usually use the term "anchor baby" but I do know what it means. The anti's that use it are not claiming that they aren't citizens because by law they are. They just know that the parents use their U.S. born children to anchor themselves to our country. Only the extreme anti's would claim that they aren't citizens. You always use the extreme side of anything to represent an entire group just like you do with the MM. How would you like it if I said the reconquistas represent the entire group of pro illegals? Not much fun when the shoe is on the other foot, is it?

Why are you yelling at me to stop using the term anchor baby when I have never used it in here? I don't take demands like that from anybody anyway. You can't demand that people do what you tell them to do. Are you some kind of control freak?

MMPete said...

Quit lumping all anti's in the same catagory. Since anti's are for the rule of law they know that children born from illegal aliens on our soil are automatic citizens. Why do you just keep mentioning Latino babies? There are other illegal aliens in our country besides Latinos. Does no one else exist in your mind or are of no importance other than Latino babies?

Again, stop screaming at me. I never called anyone an anchor baby but I know how that term was derived at. If an illegal can give birth on our soil they think they can anchor themselves to our country. That doesn't mean anyone is denying that the child is a birthright citizen. You spend too much time worrying about terms instead of trying to understand what they mean.

Dee said...

Nope. Not yelling at you. Merely responding to your question.
I oppose the use of the negative term "anchor baby" for these beautiful young citizens.

NOTHING any ANTI will say will change my mind about this term.

MMPete said...

If you weren't yelling at me then why did you address me with this remark below? Why do you only mention Latino babies? They aren't the only ones that are called "anchor babies" by some. Do you think that Latino babies are more special than other babies? You won't answer either of my questions though, will you?

Here is what you said.

"Stop calling Latino babies by that despicable name!!"

November 20, 2009 7:42 PM

Page Hits