[turtle777]

Verification System Seen Failing to Catch Illegal Hires - WSJ.com

An evaluation of E-Verify carried out for DHS by research group Westat found the program couldn't confirm whether information workers were presenting was their own, and, as a result, "many unauthorized workers obtain employment by committing identity fraud that cannot be detected by E-Verify," Westat told the department. Westat put the "inaccuracy rate for unauthorized workers" at about 54%.

How f*cking incompetent is our government ?
How can a verification system be fooled by just submitting someone else's information ?

Doesn't everyone who is eligible to work in the US have a either

a) work visa in a foreign passport
b) a green card
or c) a special employment authorization ID card (I got one of those after I applied for my green card, while waiting for the GC app. to be finalized).

Seriously, if a government that can't even get this straight, how will they fix the economy ?

-t

[OAW]

How would you propose that they "get this straight"? It seems to me that any system that requires documentation to verify employment eligibility is susceptible to people submitting fraudulent documentation. Whether the fraudulent documentation is on paper or electronic is immaterial. N'est-ce pas?

OAW

[olePigeon]

The only way you can "get this straight" is to set up a national registry with fingerprint, retina scan, and DNA for every legal citizen. When someone comes in to the country to work and requests a visa, they will be required to prove their identity via fingerprint, retina, and/or DNA testing.

How many people do you think will support a national registry that is more specific than a Social Security Number?

Good luck with that.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OAW 

How would you propose that they "get this straight"? It seems to me that any system that requires documentation to verify employment eligibility is susceptible to people submitting fraudulent documentation. Whether the fraudulent documentation is on paper or electronic is immaterial. N'est-ce pas?

OAW

I'm not saying that you can't falsify documents. But to falsify a visa in a passport or a green card is much harder than just giving out wrong information.

It seems that E-Verify doesn't require the employers to check for any IDs. What a load of BS.

-t

[OAW]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

The only way you can "get this straight" is to set up a national registry with fingerprint, retina scan, and DNA for every legal citizen. When someone comes in to the country to work and requests a visa, they will be required to prove their identity via fingerprint, retina, and/or DNA testing.

How many people do you think will support a national registry that is more specific than a Social Security Number?

Good luck with that.

Indeed. A biometric approach wouldn't be foolproof, but it would be significantly more accurate than a simple documentation based approach. Of course, conservatives and civil libertarians would scream bloody murder. There's no way the same crowd that opposes a National ID would ever go for this.

OAW

[turtle777]

But again, the current system doesn't even check for *ANY* documents.

That's why I said that the government is f*cking incompetent.

Asking for *some* sort of official ID makes it at least a bit harder to circumvent the system.

Right now, the E-Verify is really working off of an honor system.
Way to go to battle illegal employment

-t

[ghporter]

When I was hired in December, my new employer requested all sorts of data; basically the whole I9 form, which was submitted through E-Verify to make sure I was kosher to hire. It isn't like it's rocket surgery to ask for some sort of valid ID when hiring someone. Unless you don't want to know that Juan, Maurice, Kahled, or Nguen aren't legal, that is...

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

But again, the current system doesn't even check for *ANY* documents.

That's why I said that the government is f*cking incompetent.

Asking for *some* sort of official ID makes it at least a bit harder to circumvent the system.

Right now, the E-Verify is really working off of an honor system.
Way to go to battle illegal employment

-t

You are letting your anti-government rage blind you to the real issue which is employers cheating/gaming the system.

The current system does, in fact, require proof of ID and requires a form I-9 be submitted by the employer* for every new employee hired. And therein lies the problem. The verification system works ONLY IF employers actually use it and uses it correctly. If an employer wants to hire someone not authorized to work in this country they can do by a) not filing an I-9 form for their hire or b) filing a form with false information. So, the problem with illegal workers in this country is due to malfeasance on the part of employers moreso than to any incompetence on the part of the government.
*I have three different part-time jobs working for organizations that range in size from 18-200 employees. All three of my employers had me fill out the I-9 in its entirety when I was hired.

I agree though, that the system for catching illegal workers could be improved. If the current system is to be improved what is needed is tighter integration between the various federal agencies that oversee employment in this country. This would require coordination and exchange of data between DHS, SS, and IRS. If they were allowed to cross reference the others databases the chances of catching an illegal worker would rise tremendously. (Because of privacy laws it is very difficult for one federal agency to share data it collects with other federal agencies.)

Of course, there is a real easy way to reduce illegal employment to near-zero levels in this country: Institute a single, unified, nationwide, national ID program that combines the features of a passport (proof of DOB and citizenship) with a drivers license (proof of DOB and residency). Or, simply require every citizen in this country to have a passport in order to work. No passport means no work. Such a procedure would almost guarantee that every worker is a citizen and therefore permitted to work in this country.

[Andy8]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Of course, there is a real easy way to reduce illegal employment to near-zero levels in this country: Institute a single, unified, nationwide, national ID program that combines the features of a passport (proof of DOB and citizenship) with a drivers license (proof of DOB and residency). Or, simply require every citizen in this country to have a passport in order to work. No passport means no work. Such a procedure would almost guarantee that every worker is a citizen and therefore permitted to work in this country.

Thats what we use here, and it works very well. It even now includes some medical data so hospitals/ambulances can act faster in an emergency.

No ID card = no work, no residency and so on.

[Big Mac]

The left would say a passport requirement would discriminate against the poor. The right would complain about the privacy implications of a national ID card.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The left would say a passport requirement would discriminate against the poor. The right would complain about the privacy implications of a national ID card.

Absolutely correct. And we would still have no strict method with which to keep illegal workers from working in this country.

So, those on the left and on the right have to ask themselves if minimizing/eliminating illegals workers in this country is more important than a) imposing a burdensome cost on poor people or b) granting the federal government too much power in regards to individual identification.

[ghporter]

The I9 does NOT require a passport, though that is the best form of ID for this purpose. The I9 instructions (last page) list a number of acceptable forms of ID. None of 'em is particularly hard to get, nor expensive to get. You can use a voter registration card to establish identity and a Social Security card for authorization to work (unless it's marked specifically that this card is not for that purpose), both of which are free.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

The I9 does NOT require a passport, though that is the best form of ID for this purpose. The I9 instructions (last page) list a number of acceptable forms of ID. None of 'em is particularly hard to get, nor expensive to get. You can use a voter registration card to establish identity and a Social Security card for authorization to work (unless it's marked specifically that this card is not for that purpose), both of which are free.

No one said it did.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The left would say a passport requirement would discriminate against the poor. The right would complain about the privacy implications of a national ID card.

Well, I guess the masses if illegal workers fixes the issue for both groups

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

You are letting your anti-government rage blind you to the real issue which is employers cheating/gaming the system.

Ok, so they ask for some sort of ID, but the system is so weak that it actually fails more times than it works. It's still a joke.

IMO, they either improve it or abandon it altogether. There is no point in having a dummy system that doesn't do its job.

-t

[Big Mac]

I don't know about that. Just because a currently declining number of illegal immigrants successfully make it across the border in a given period doesn't mean we should abandon border enforcement. Same principle.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Ok, so they ask for some sort of ID, but the system is so weak that it actually fails more times than it works. It's still a joke.

IMO, they either improve it or abandon it altogether. There is no point in having a dummy system that doesn't do its job.

-t

There's a real easy way to improve it. Allow the various federal agencies involved in the hiring/employment process openly shared data amongst themselves to look for fraudulent submissions. As a citizen, are you okay with the IRS sharing its taxpayer data with DHS and SSA and vice versa such that when an employer submits an I-9 form to DHS it is automatically referenced against IRS and Social Security records for verification purposes?


Personally, I prefer the approach of making every US citizen get a passport and requiring a passport for employment. When you turn 16 you get your first passport along with your first drivers license and first paying job. It gets renewed at 21, when you are old enough to drink, with an updated picture and again at 25 with an updated picture. (People's physical, facial appearances are still changing well into their mid 20s.) From 25 onward it gets renewed every 10 years like normal.

[andi*pandi]

That may be good, but what about forgeries? How easy are they to come by, or is it just in the movies?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Personally, I prefer the approach of making every US citizen get a passport and requiring a passport for employment. When you turn 16 you get your first passport along with your first drivers license and first paying job. It gets renewed at 21, when you are old enough to drink, with an updated picture and again at 25 with an updated picture. (People's physical, facial appearances are still changing well into their mid 20s.) From 25 onward it gets renewed every 10 years like normal.

Nice suggestion.

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

That may be good, but what about forgeries? How easy are they to come by, or is it just in the movies?

I once read that a forged US passport will run anywhere from $ 2,000 upwards.
Blank US passports (stock) would fetch $ 3,000 and up.

No solution is impenetrable, but the government should make it harder than making a false verbal claim.

Edit: Thsi site claims a top-quality US passport forgery will run $ 25,000.

http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/ids.htm

-t

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Originally Posted by ghporter 

The I9 does NOT require a passport...

No one said it did.

Big Mac suggested that a passport requirement might be seen as discriminatory...

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The left would say a passport requirement would discriminate against the poor. The right would complain about the privacy implications of a national ID card.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The left would say a passport requirement would discriminate against the poor. The right would complain about the privacy implications of a national ID card.

According to the Left, any- and everything discriminates against someone.

You better just ignore them.

-t

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

How f*cking incompetent is our government ?
How can a verification system be fooled by just submitting someone else's information ?

I still think the US just doesn't want to know: there are many industries that are `dependent' on illegals to do certain jobs (harvesting on farms and working in the meat industry comes to mind).

Much of this would be solved requiring a national id card: it doesn't have to be a passport, but something similarly secure. At least the PA driver's license that I got was printed right in front of me and was basically a just a `credit card with a photo.'