8/6/2019 FY12 Budget Anti-Immigrant Amendments Talking
Points
1/1
FY2012 Senate State BudgetBrief summary and analysis of Senate
budget amendment 122.1 that unfairly target immigrants
E Verify Mandate
Forces most individuals and companies including subcontractors
doing business with any state entity to use Everify.
Why this is a bad idea It will be costly for small businesses
and redundant since all employers must check immigration status
through the federal I 9 form. One small business estimated the
cost of compliance at $27,000. i Over 20% of initial E verify
rejections are wrong. E verify errors hurt US citizen workers
because
employers will often fire, refuse to hire or even notify the
authorized worker of the error. ii
Attorney General Mandates that the AG continue to receive
complaints about employment of undocumented workers, refer all
substantiated reports to ICE, and report annually to the
legislature about each complaint including the date, nature of
complaint, AGs action on complaint, and whether it was referred to
ICE.
Why this is a bad idea Unfunded mandate on the AGs office.
Increases AGs role in the enforcement of immigration laws
without providing any additional funding. Unnecessarily
redundant as the federal government already maintains a 24 hotline
for such reporting. Undermines public safety and AGs efforts to
strengthen relationships with local communities. Victims
and witnesses of crimes will not come forward or assist with the
prosecution of serious criminals.
Driving without a License
This
amendment
increases
the
fines
and
allows
for
incarceration
for
driving
without
a
license
or
valid
registration.
Why this is a bad idea Such serious changes to criminal law and
penalties deserve careful and full consideration outside of the
budget debate including the financial implications of
potentially increasing levels of incarceration.
Housing Denies access to state public housing to immigrants who
do not have, do not yet have, or cannot prove a lawful immigration
status.
Why this is a bad idea Effectively excludes US citizen children
from state housing based on their parents immigration status
thereby punishing citizen family members for the status of their
relatives. Increases homelessness of US citizen children,
increasing the rate of homeless in the Commonwealth and
the cost to state agencies. Potentially unconstitutional as a US
court ruled that MA could not deny access to public housing based
on
immigration status.
i Chamber of Commerce of the USA v. Chertoff, No. 08 cv 3444 AW
(D.Md.). ii
Findings of the Web Based E Verify Program Evaluation (Westat,
Dec. 2009), www.uscis.gov/USCIS/E Verify/E Verify/Final%20E
Verify%20Report%2012 16 09_2.pdf, p. 157
