Since mass deportation (rounding them all up) is an almost impossible task, this bill, if not watered down and stringently enforced will help the problem tremendously.

Arizona finally wisened up and got tough. As a result, the illegals are moving to more "friendly" locations. If we were to make the entire nation (although at this point I would settle for Indiana) an "unfriendly" location - a la this bill - then they would go home of their own volition and try to get into the country legally.

One of the greatest shams perpetrated on the American people is the idea of anchor babies being allowed via the Constitution. That wasnt the intent. And no, Smoochy, we dont send them packing sans children, we send them home as a family. When the child grows up and wants to come to America - then we will talk. But even then, you are not bringing 10 relatives with you unless they go through the proper channels.

And while I disdain the idea of a National ID card, I would seriously consider such a thing if it meant getting rid of illegals. (I seriously doubt they were arrested. Detained/questioned maybe, but not arrested.)

Some of the things often "sshhhh"ed about on the illegal immigration debate is the hidden cost of illegal immigrants. For example:

1)The amount of money that is drained from our economy by being shipped home to their home countries. To the tune of billions of dollars a year.

2)The amount of the crime increase. Both violent crime and property crime. Not to mention the number of deaths attributed to illegals driving on the roads.

3)The rising cost of health care and school systems as these people place an incredible burden on already struggling resources.

4)Disease. The number of 3rd World disease cases is increasing dramatically. Tuberculosis is starting to make a comeback, as is leprosy and several other nasty things that we had all but eradicated in America.

So, I am all for just about anything that reduces/diminishes/eliminates the illegal alien problem - as long as amnesty is not in the mix anywhere. We tried that in the 80s and it only got us more illegals.

Sanction the employers, question/detain/deport immediately those that are found, and build a fence/wall/militarized zone fully patroled by the National Guard. Just find them and send them packing. Otherwise America will start to look like Mexico in another 20 years. (If it takes that long.)

And Smoochy - as for your crime statistics - I would imagine that a lot of that is black on brown crime, as they generally have more animosity between those two groups than any other two groups of people in the US.

The whole question here revolves around one simple issue and only one, no matter

how the liberals try to skew the issue. We are a nation based on the order of law, are we not? When you speak of immigrants they are either illegal or legal, no other choices there. Whether they are undocumented or student visa, green card etc. they fall into one of the two categories. While I do not have the stats at hand anybody can go online and see the DOJ and FBI stats on crime. Hispanic crime and incarceration for violent crimes is outpacing other ethnicities. From an economic standpoint illegals are lowering the standard of living in this country. They are not the only cause but they are contributory. If the illegals who come to this country as well as their support institutions which are already in place here, were half as vocal and active in Mexico to bring up the Mexican standard of living, then there would be no influx of illegals crossing the border. But what is not seen or shown by the media is the ongoing progress to the formation of a North American Economic Union, similiar to the European Economic Union. There is a very concise article in the August Reviewtitled " The North American Union and the Larger Plan" by Dennis L. Cuddy , Ph.D. (www.augustreview.com) The article details what has been done and what will be done in the near future to bring about this North American Union. One of the items is the free movement of workers. Can this movement be stopped, I doubt it. Should this movement/evolution be stopped? That all depends where you sit on the economic fence.

Monandez;govrnmnt figures put the remittances at 123 billion dollars a year with 23 billion going to Mexico alone. dozens of hospital ERS in southern California have had to close because of uninsured patients who use them as primary care centers as the majority of Americans have some kind of ins.which means that they are being used by those who don't qualify for health care at regular health care facilities. Also a drug resistant strain of TB which is endemic only to Mexico is rampant here is California,and leprosy is back and brought in by Marshall islanders. This is from the world health orginization. Look it up.

Looks like you got the discussion going.

From a businessman's point of view, the only problem I have with this legislation is that it asks that we compare Alien Status against an flawed database. And... how do you check for a false name? Or... how do you prove you checked and found nothing but the name gets put on later?

In short, the burden of proof is on the employer and I'm not sure that's where it ought to be.

Smoochy -

Yes, we are all human. Your point?

Do I hate these people? No. (I dont know many of them. I have met a few.)

However, it is beyond a matter of liking/not liking illegal aliens. What is at stake is the very nature of our country.

The economy suffers as a whole, the standard of living is decreased as a whole, and our cultural standard is lowered as a whole.

They are similar to Californians (and strangely enough locusts)... They devour/destroy a perfectly good place to the point it is worthless and then move on to another good place, only to bring with them the very ideas that destroyed the last place.

Mexico (and a large part of other Central/South American countries) have resources to be quite wealthy - as nations. However, the Mexican government (and presumably others) prefer to keep the wealth concentrated in the hands of a small minority. Here in America we already solved that problem - with a War of Independence and a Civil War. Its time they go home and fix their country instead of bleeding ours out.

Since someone else has answered the author's request for clarification, I'll not do that, but sort of tell you where I'm coming from here.

As an employer, I would say that we have Federal I-9 forms mandated now for employees. It just seems that enforcement of illegal alien status should not rest exclusively on the employer. And a 'one strike' and your out is not due process.

Employers are burdened with enormous amounts of checks and mandates as it stands. In the business I'm in (Health Care), it takes almost an hour for an employee to complete a new hire checklist of forms plus we do the following on line checks on every new hire: MVR (for people who will operate our vehicles) Sex Offender Registry; Criminal Records Check; Federal Health Care Programs Exclusion Database; IDHS Registry, Certification registry plus we do a pre-employment drug screen in house.

Now you can look at this two ways: the first is, "What's one more?"; or the second is, "whose responsibility is it really?" or "how many checks can we pile on." One more check is 10 minutes of my current employee's time to make the check. Where is our compensation for that? Does it improve our prductivity? The answer is obviously no.

If you want to get employers on board, why not a tax credit to offset the cost?

And... no one has yet my question about what happens if an illegal alien shows up and with a really good set of forged documents and gives you a non-databased name? How do you prove you did the check?

I just get tired of legislators dumping their issues on employers without any consideration of what it means, what it costs, and what the real world is really like.

So Molon Labe you acknowledge that we are all Human and then continue to call these humans ALIENS, I guess you don't get it huh?

As far as this quote "Its time they go home and fix their country instead of bleeding ours out."

If the US would stop meddling in everyone else's business, perhaps they would try to fix things in their own countries. Example: President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, a socialist that the US obviously doesn't like. The US has denied it's involvement in a coup attempt against him in 2002...but that doesn't seem to explain the Navy ships in the waters at that time now does it?

If greedy businessmen were willing to pay a man what he was worth, US Citizens would not be competing against immigrants and uneducated for jobs. If a businessman can pay someone less to do the job he will, hece why Bondsman is right to bring up Outsourcing.

Personally, I can barely afford to buy fresh fruits and vegetables now, I surely would not be able to buy ANY fresh fruit or vegetables if we actually paid people what they are worth for doing those jobs, WOULD YOU?

Smoochy -

Yes, I understood your poor attempt at trying to say something about humans vs aliens...I have yet to figure out if it was merely a pathetic attempt at wit, or if I should chalk it up to ignorance.

Any group of people wanting to fix their own country has nothing to do with them coming here, or us helping them. The French helped the Americans during the Revolution, on American soil, b/c they felt they had a vested economic stake in the outcome. If (and I dont know the facts, although you seem to be quite put out that the US govt would even consider taking out Chavez...a friend of yours?) the Government felt like they had a vested interest in the outcome of regime change - that has nothing to do with allowing hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans to come to this country illegally.

We (as a nation) have supported regime change in a number of countries. Other countries have done likewise. However, that is not an open invitation to disregard our laws and lower the standards of our country.

As for your "greedy businessman" scenario - that is a straw man argument based on a false premise. However, if the ILLEGAL immigrants were not here, and said greedy businessman wanted the job done, he would have to pay whatever prevailing wage was for that job. If nobody is going to do it for $5/hr, then he can either raise the pay or do it himself. However, if he can find one person (that is entitled to be here) to do it for $5/hr, then he is helping that person make $5 more per hour than they were previously making...otherwise that person wouldnt take the job.

As for your fruits and vegetables - I dont have a problem with documented migrant workers. As long as they play by the rules, we know where they are, and they are only here seasonally.

I cant really comment on your near lack of ability to buy fresh fruits and vegetables other than to say that if they are that important to you, then perhaps you should re-prioritize your spending. Do you have a computer? Internet? Cable? Land-line phone? Car payment? Jelly-of-the-month club? (I dont know your financials, nor do I really care...just try to follow along with me.) If the fresh fruits and vegetables are that important to you then you will have to sacrifice something else in order to get them. (And if you are really that bad off - perhaps you should try applying for food stamps. They have so much money that recently they were advertising on TV to get people to apply. But that is another rant in and of itself...)