Harry Reid opposes E-verify - why?

chanel

Silver Member
Jun 8, 2009
12,098
3,202
98
People's Republic of NJ
"When you go to the unemployment office there's many U.S. citizens who are unemployed construction workers and they don't have jobs because right now, some of those construction companies find it easier to hire undocumented workers," said Reporter Nathan Baca.

"I think that any information you have in that regard is absolutely without foundation," responded Reid.

But a Pew Hispanic Center study shows 17-percent of all construction workers are in the United States illegally. Reid says not in Nevada. "That may be some place, but it's not here in Nevada."

But their latest 2009 numbers show Nevada is the state with the highest percentage of "unauthorized immigrants" in the labor force.

Republican Senator Jeff Sessions introduced an amendment in 2009 that would have made E-Verify permanent and mandatory for all construction companies. Senator Reid did not allow the idea to come up for a vote.

Reid Declines Vote on Illegal Worker Plan - KLAS-TV Channel 8 News Las Vegas

No illegals working construction in Nevada Harry? You really think your constituents are both blind and brain dead doncha? :evil:
 
Your snippet doesn't offer many clues as to why. Doesn't even seem to say what this amendment was amending, what else was in the amendment (any poison pills?), if it was a motion to recommit for a bill Reid didn't want to shuffle back through committee, does Reid have actual policy objections, etc.

The article makes it sound as if he's saving it as a bargaining chip for other immigration proposals. If that's the case, it's a welcome change from the Obama strategy of giving away the store in advance and then hoping things work out.
 
I think it's interesting that people will say a simple government programs like e-verify won't work but that massive National Healthcare somehow will.
 
Read the article Greenbeard. He claims its not perfect. So doing nothing is?

There is only one reason hard core libs like Reid oppose ENFORCEMENT of current immigration laws. And that reason is?

Vote the bums out. They have nothing but contempt for the suckers footing their bills.
 
As I said, the article makes it sound as if he's retaining it for a bargaining chip in future immigration legislating (that's the bit about not doing things piecemeal). The "it's imperfect" bit would then just be rhetoric.
 
Seems so. But saying "there are no illegals working in construction in Nevada" makes him look kinda silly doesn't it? Or some may even say "a total fucking liar".
 

Forum List

Back
Top