c/o Immigration Law Center
“While Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) promises that his mandatory E-Verify legislation (HR 2885) is a jobs creation bill, the mark-up of the bill in the House Judiciary Committee last week proved that it is anything but. Though the bill passed the committee by a 22-13 party line vote, the debate in committee and amendments offered make it crystal clear the bill would actually yield job losses. The debate leading up to the committee mark up also shows just how fractured conservatives have become on this issue—and much of it focuses on concerns over jobs. In fact, an unlikely coalition of progressive and conservative organizations joined together to oppose the bill, turning a host of job arguments upside down.”
Here is second life for news that matters:
US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack calls E-Verify “unworkable”
E-Verify Bill Survives Judiciary Committee, But Faces Opposition on Many Fronts
“E-Verify E-Vicerates Labor Market”
Connecticut:“Enhanced ID is driver’s choice”
BTC Commentary- I just figured I would make you aware that printing the words “Not for federal purposes” is part and parcel Real ID regulatory compliance. I know it’s an annoying detail, but you deserve to know what’s going on with your State. For instance, if you flip over a California license, you’ll probably see the words “Not for federal purposes” on the back. This is California’s way of disengaging federal hardball over Real ID. They did this by being first in line to submit to 90% regulatory compliance at the DMV and then telling everyone they’re not going along with Real ID, “because that’s bad!” I don’t think a yachting, wine and cheese state like Connecticut would be much different -do you? It’s not really much of a choice after all, is it?