The term "Illegal Immigration" lets employers off the hook

[KurtNYC]

There is nothing illegal about being in the US as a non-citizen. There are 1000s of non citizens walking around NYC right now. They could all stay legally until their tourist Visas expire then they need only leave and come back to reset the clock.

There is nothing illegal about being here -- the crime is committed when an American employer pays them under the table and off the books but you won't hear many in the MSM calling this "illegal hiring." Immigrant labor and domestic labor are the victims of this crime. Neither is getting a decent wage nor safe working conditions. I can walk down the sidewalk right now and see signs in restaurant windows that say "Necesitamos lavos platos" -- openly soliciting to illegally hire people off the books and tax free. The employer has no fear of being arrested, demonized or deported and yet they are the ones ripping off public services by not paying taxes on wages.

The prejudice and racism that is fomented by the Lou Dobbs and Don Imus's of the nation's airwaves and those who are much more subtle, has a very real economic agenda -- to keep labor cheap and plentiful. Racism = profits (for the few). Sadly, low income families are played against each other, to oppress each other. When they really want the same things -- decent wages and stability for their families. Agri-business, restaurants and the hospitality industry certainly don't believe that the people they employ 12 hours a day are "lazy" or "dishonest" because if they did, they would not hire them. They enjoy the benefits of the labor these people provide but to keep them cheap they use racism.

Selectively framing "crimes" protects the perpetrators. One need only look at the so-called "DC Madam" case to see this playing out on a whole different scenario. First they coin a term for the event which locks it into a distorted perspective. Just like the immigrant worker scenario, the employers in this case (the rich "Johns") are left out of the frame and then the "criminals" are declared to be those who performed work for them. The prostitutes did not commit adultery and they are not hypocrites yet they will be portrayed as the criminals. And their employers will be portrayed as neutral or even as victims (the term "honey-pot" has been floated in the MSM).

But I don't believe that employers of prostitutes are victims and I do not believe that families should be criminalized simply because they came to be hired by US employers whose business model is based on cheap, tax-free, illegal hiring. They aren't "taking jobs that Americans won't do" but rather filling jobs that Americans (or anyone with a green card) are, according to those doing the hiring, not even eligible for.

edit to add "not" in front of "hire them" in paragraph 3

[ClassWarrior]

1. That's right. The discussion should be about criminal employers.

Framing, framing, framing!

NGU.

[Donnachaidh]

2. BINGO!

Employers should be going to JAIL. From the stepford wife hiring the guy on the corner to the CEO's that turn a blind eye to hiring of undocumented aliens.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. I'm A Bit Confused. If They Don't Have Visas, Then They Are Illegal Immigrants, No?

[ClassWarrior]

5. And the 2007 Missing the Point Award goes to...

B-)

NGU.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. It's Not About Missing Points. It's About Making Valid Ones.

The argument about employers not being held up to high enough standards could've been made fine without the misguided and inaccurate depiction of immigrants not being illegal to begin with. The latter part and the points made in reference to it were really silly, despite the strong and accurate points made about the employers role in the whole thing.

[ClassWarrior]

10. Okay.

:eyes:

NGU.

[KurtNYC]

8. only if they work here

if you don't work then you're a tourist that doesn't affect labor laws and which serves to bring foreign-earned money into the U.S.

if you enter in an unregistered way -- not through a border / custom checkpoint, or if you stay longer than a limited amount of time, then you are deportable but you're not considered to be immigrating (as opposed to vacationing) unless you pursue employment here

edit for clarity - removed "retirees"

[napi21]

4. Lou Dobbs HAS talked about that. In fact, he has many times

said that employers who knowingly employ illegal aliens should go to prison! He's also had a number of guests on his show who also stated that. The reason I know that for sure is because that has always been MY position, and I'm always elated when some talking head puts it on TV!

[orpupilofnature57]

6. Truth from the $$$$$ is rare , your right.

[KurtNYC]

9. I have seen him say that

my inclusion of him was based mostly on my seeing his weird townhall show this week. I'm about 50/50 on Dobbs -- he does say some of the right things but to me he is the slick version of racism. He puts the frame out as "Illegal Immigrants and Border Security" which makes the undocumented workers sound like a physical danger or invasion. It is fear mongering. The borders have been open because the large employers want them open -- they even said so to those Minuteman guys. They said 'this will raise the price of groceries, hotel rooms and restaurant meals.'

I don't disagree with many of the things Dobbs says but the fear mongering and xenophobia put me off.

[murloc]

11. So its legal to be here as a non-citizen after bypassing immigration

as long as you don't get a job?

"There is nothing illegal about being here -- the crime is committed when an American employer pays them under the table "

I know the Bush's have arrested and deported people for simply having an expired Visa, or for having entered the US via unofficial entry points (such as the desert river crossings etc)

If these people have not committed any crimes but are being rounded up unjustly, we should be all over it.

But honestly, is that really true? I don't know much about immigration laws, but I thought that overstaying a Visa, or crossing at unofficial entry points was a crime.

[KurtNYC]

12. well if a person comes into the country without passing through

customs then they have committed a crime that has to do with crossing the border in an unlawful manner. similarly if a person comes through official border crossings then they present ID and they are allowed to be in the country for some limited amount of time. If they overstay that time limit, then they have committed a crime also.

A third scenario is a person enters the country through a checkpoint, essentially say they are here for "pleasure" (not business) and then if that person works for money (or any compensation) they have committed a crime.

But none of those three crimes is "illegal immigration". MY OP was focused on the language and the way this issue has been framed. "Illegal immigration" is a generality. It doesn't refer to a specific crime but rather a set of unlawful actions on the part of both the employees and employers. On the other hand:
Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)
Recruitment and Employment of Illegal Aliens
Encouraging and Harboring Illegal Aliens
Tax Crimes

see: http://www.mnforsustain.org/immigration_hiring_law_excerpts_from_us_code.htm

are all specific crimes which fall under the umbrella of the term "illegal immigration". Note that all of them are committed by the employers of undocument workers. And I note that the law uses the term "illegal aliens" -- which seems to me to be still more loaded language. It is redundant which makes it seem a little dramatic. And then it refers to human beings as "aliens" !? whereas in other situations a term like "foreign nationals" would be used.

And to be clear and answer to your point, yes, the workers who pursue employment here without proper documents are parties to a crime but they are by far the lesser party. The problem will not be properly addressed until the employer side of the issue is properly addressed. And I would start by start by using a different term -- "unlawful employment" or "unlawful hiring." I think either of those terms better encompass the crimes listed above.

[murloc]

13. I think I see your point

We are mis-using the word 'immigration' and 'illegal immigrant'...and that in term refocuses the problem incorrectly.

Perhaps instead of using the word illegal immigrant, others words should be used to to describe the crime and person/company committing it.

Perhaps more accurate terms could be describe the people breaking these various laws:
"criminal employer", "foreign trespasser", "criminal entrant", "border criminal" come to mind.

I do disagree that 'alien' is improper. Due to science fiction we've come to associate alien with a being from outer space (usually a malevolent being). However "alien" has historically been used to describe a person from a foreign country and science fiction simply borrowed the term ("space alien") when describing a being from outer space came into vogue.

Nonetheless, I suspect this is non-starter. Its hard to enough to get the American population to use language properly. Heck we cannot even get our president to say "nuclear" correctly.

[KurtNYC]

15. I'm a fascinated by the way these things work

I think it sucks that it is so easy to screw labor in general and I know people could live better if labor was more cohesive. But when looking at the big picture, I think it is paradoxical -- like looking at an Echer painting -- that the employers of undocument workers can use racism and hatred of the very people they value in order to pay them less and escape blame for their crimes.

[Cleita]

14. This is why organizations who study them prefer the term

undocumented alien, or undocumented worker. There is no illegality here. What they did illegal was cross the border without permission, but they aren't illegal while here, only undocumented.