GreenvilleOnline.com
October 25, 2012
October 25, 2012
COLUMBIA
— Orin McCammon said he had heard something about E-Verify in the news, the
federal electronic database used to verify new hires, but didn't think it had
anything to do with his business.
That
is until a state auditor last month visited Cedars Homeowners Association in
North Charleston, where he works, and asked to see paperwork related to the
Association's hirings since July.
The
Association then became one of the first seven employers in South Carolina to
be cited for violating the state's newest tweaks to its immigration law, which
requires all new employees, other than farm laborers, ministers and domestic
servants, to be verified through the federal database.
First-time
violators are placed on probation for a year, must file quarterly reports and
have their names posted on the state Labor, Licensing and Regulation website.
"I
thought it was something applicable to large organizations," McCammon told
GreenvilleOnline.com. "We probably employ one to three people
normally."
According
to LLR, the agency last year cited 396 businesses across the state for various
infractions under the previous version of the state's immigration law. LLR
auditors found 171 businesses from January through June who did not use
E-Verify but were given a pass under a provision that exempts those caught in
the first six months.
Sen.
Larry Martin, a Pickens Republican who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee,
said despite the differences in numbers between the old and new law, he
believes the new law is doing its job to keep employers honest and chase away
illegal immigrants.
"It's
really working out pretty well," he said.
But
some in the Hispanic community disagree, arguing the law was aimed at a small
number of illegal immigrants who mostly left the state anyway because of the
Great Recession.
"This
law was a waste of my taxpayers' money," said Gregory Torrales, president
of the South Carolina Hispanic Leadership Council. "We could have spent
that money better. It was feel-good legislation."
Frank
Knapp, CEO and president of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of
Commerce, said the law is another burden for the state's small businesses.
"It
was an extra burden on small businesses that don't need extra burdens put on
them," Knapp said. "The state is making a policy and making small
businesses implement the policy for something that politicians wanted. And that
just doesn't seem fair at all."
In
addition to requiring employers use E-verify for new employees, the new law
also creates a state immigration police force that has been up and running
since July.
And
that unit has run across criminal activity involving immigration laws that has
grown, said it's director, Lt. E.C. Johnson.
The
unit of six officers spread throughout the state is not after people who might
be in the country illegally, Johnson said. Rather, the unit's aim is those
participating in criminal activity involving the violation of the state's
immigration laws, such as falsifying identification documents or using
falsified paperwork to get hired.
The
officers respond to requests for investigation by law enforcement and by
citizens, Jonson said.
"It
has been really busy," he said.
Other
provisions of the law have been struck down by the courts. The U.S. Justice
Department and the American Civil Liberties Union challenged South Carolina's
law last year, which had been modeled after Arizona'a law, arguing it was
unconstitutional and would spawn racial profiling.
U.S.
District Judge Richard Gergel subsequently blocked three provisions. Those
included requirements for immigrants to carry registration papers on them and
to allow police to check the status of anyone they stop or arrest for something
else, provided they held a reasonable suspicion the immigrants were in the
country illegally.
The
U.S. Supreme Court subsequently ruled that states have the right to allow
status checks, a provision of Arizona's immigration law. But the provisions
blocked by Gergel are still on hold pending the outcome of an appeal by the
state.
Johnson
said there are still 17 other provisions of the law that are valid, plus prior
laws that were not challenged.
He
said his officers have made "a number of arrests." But Sherri
Iacobelli, a spokesman for the state Department of Public Safety, which houses
the unit, said the agency will not release exact numbers because of the
sensitivity of the issue.
"This
unit is so new," she said. "Because of the sensitive nature, because
we are working with ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement), we're not
going to get into specific numbers. The director is just not comfortable with
that at this point."
Johnson
said officers have arrested immigrants on both misdemeanors and felonies but
all of the charges related to violations of immigration law. He said his unit,
which works with ICE, does not respond to complaints that someone suspects a
work crew has illegal workers.
"We're
not going after anybody who is not involved in criminal activity," he
said. "If you're not involved in criminal activity, no matter who you are,
you're not going to see us."
Those
who suspect a resident is an illegal alien can contact federal immigration
authorities, he said. His unit relies on the U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement agency solely to determine whether anyone is in the national
illegally and consults with the agency in its investigations.
Lawmakers
appropriated $1.3 million for the unit last year, which was to pay for Johnson,
an administrative assistant and 10 officers, as well as benefits, training and
equipment. But the money would only stretch for six officers, Johnson said. He
said there is enough work for 10 officers. But Iacobellii said officials want
to see what happens over the course of the year before requesting more.
"As
it gets up and running, it's going to become more obvious what resources we
have as opposed to what we need," she said. "Right now it's still so
new. I think that's something the director would consider down the road based
on what the need is."
Local
law enforcement can already contact ICE if they suspect someone involved in a
crime is in the country illegally, Johnson said. His officers are used more to
investigate situations in which police suspect violations of the immigration
law.
Far
from seeing problems associated with illegal immigration dip as a result of the
economy, Johnson, who has been in law enforcement more than 30 years, says he
believes they have increased.
"Being
in law enforcement as long as I have been in law enforcement, I don't really
see a difference for anything that has been less," he said. "It's
remained consistent and as a matter of fact has grown. I think the activity
level of violations has increased somewhat."
Johnson
said the violators are not all from one country or even all from Latin America.
"The
violations we've seen are multinational," he said. "The violations
are not confined to any one region of the world."
Torrales
said only about 1 percent of Hispanics in the state are undocumented. And he
believes it is a waste of resources to create a state police force to go after
immigration violators.
"We
aren't Arizona," he said. "We aren't Texas. We're not a border state
to another country. While we need immigration reform, we need proper
immigration reform and we need it at the national level."
He
said rather than spend so much money enforcing a state immigration law,
lawmakers could do more good spending the money to create new jobs and assist
businesses.
"I'd
rather us spend our money on the 250,000 who are unemployed," he said.
Martin
said lawmakers are somewhat restricted in what they can do by court rulings. He
said federal immigration officials have ended a program used to train local law
enforcement to enforce immigration law on behalf of the federal government, a
decision which he said might only be reversed by a new administration.
He
said he does not believe the program for checking businesses is either too
harsh or too lenient.
Martin
said the Supreme Court's ruling did not allow states to assess businesses
financial penalties, finding that was the province of federal authorities. So
he said lawmakers removed fines from the law.
According
to LLR, last year the state assessed almost $1 million in fines on businesses
violating the previous immigration law. But all but about $8,000 of that was
waived because they were first-time offenders.
The
current law is just as lenient for those running afoul of the immigration
statutes for the first time. Those caught a second or subsequent time not
submitting new employees through the federal database can have their right to
conduct business in the state suspended for 10-30 days. The auditing program
costs about $250,000 a year, Knight said, which is paid for using licensing
fees and revenue collected by LLR.
From
Jan. 1 through Aug. 31, Knight said, state auditors checked or attempted to
check on 3,124 employers. Of that number, 1,092 did not hire anyone during that
time period, 1,799 verified hires using E-Verify and 233 hired workers without
using the federal database, Knight said. Most of those, however, occurred in
the first six months and were not penalized.
Knight
said the figures amount to a 92 percent compliance rate. He said many of the 62
employers not using E-Verify caught after July 1 hired their employees before
July, meaning they were ineligible for penalties.
"We're
finding that when we cited an employer for a violation, they are immediately
enrolling in E-Verify," he said.
Martin
said the idea of checking businesses is not to catch violators but to encourage
all employers to use the federal database.
"They're
in the business of encouraging compliance," he said. "And
particularly in dealing with employers, many of whom are small employers, that
for whatever reason don't know they are supposed to be E-Verifying their
employees."
Martin
said even during periods of last year when the old law no longer was being
enforced and the new law had not yet started, he believes most businesses were
using the federal database. He said he believes most of the businesses not
following the law are small businesses that may not know about it.
Several
small business owners or managers who asked not to be identified out of a fear
of retaliation, said they did not know about the E-verify requirement in the
law. Almost all of the businesses first cited by the state appear to be small
businesses, including a pizza place, the homeowners association, a heating and
air repair company and an electric business.
Martin
said he does not believe the penalties handed first-time offenders are painful
for businesses.
"I
don't think that's unfair punishment," he said. "If they went out and
took no action, they very well might ignore it. I have had it suggested to me
that we eviscerated the law last year when we made those changes. We did what
we had to do to comply with the Supreme Court changes. There is teeth in this
law. There is substantial teeth in this law. We're just not able to raise the
money in fines we did in 2008 because the Supreme Court says you can't."
Knight
said the other point the audits make is that South Carolina's businesses are
still not hiring.
"That's
what we're finding a lot in the first months of the law," he said.
"Particularly for small employers, they don't hire often anyway and in
this economy they've not been doing very much hiring."
Martin
said he believes both the new law and the economy have reduced the problem of
illegal immigration.
"I think there were some illegal
immigrants who left who went from community to community trying to find work
and then moved on," he said. "I think they said South Carolina is
pretty serious about enforcing the law. I think there is a little bit of that
and a little bit of the poor economy that came to play. I don't hear it quite
the way I did hear it three or four years ago, particularly before the Great
Recession began. But I still hear it somewhat."
http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20121025/NEWS/310190100/Previous blogs on this issue:
Small business deceived on E-Verify mandate
ACTION ALERT!! Say NO to mandatory E-Verify
E-Verify losing conservative support nationally
Top 8 reasons for House to oppose E-Verify mandate
Party loyalty & political fear wins, small business loses…again
Don’t Make Small Business do the State’s Work
Senate throws small businesses under the bus….again
No comments:
Post a Comment