Illegal immigrants bill advances
Legislation backer says it's what voters want; foe sees thin veil for racism
Legislation backer says it's what voters want; foe sees thin veil for racism
The Post and Courier
South Carolina House Speaker Bobby Harrell
On the Web
Gov. Mark Sanford’s statement on the House immigration bill
COLUMBIA — A statewide onslaught against illegal immigrants passed the first of three major hurdles Wednesday, but critics argued that it's nothing more than "feel-good" legislation that panders to South Carolinians frustrated by Congress' failure to act.
Meanwhile, some immigration advocates find the state legislation a thin veil for racism.
"Anytime you pass a bill that the public is very vocal about wanting, someone is going to say legislators are pandering," said House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, who is lead sponsor of the bill. "The reality is, we're just responding to what our constituents have said they want to see done.
"Folks who are here illegally are here illegally, and if we're not going to enforce the law, there is no point in having it."
The bill will make its way across the Statehouse lobby, where Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, said it should be well received. Next, the bill would be sent to a conference committee to tweak language or add proposals as a final version is hammered out, he said.
The legislation, which is similar to a Senate proposal passed last year, directs the State Law Enforcement Division to work out an agreement with federal authorities to allow the state to enforce federal immigration laws, including deportation. The bill also requires law enforcement to identify the legal status of any person arrested, and if they are found to be in the country illegally, the state would bill the federal government for any costs.
Legal residents would be given the right to sue an employer who terminates them while keeping a person the boss knows to be an illegal immigrant on the payroll under the bill, among other provisions.
James Hadstate, a Lowcountry attorney specializing in migrant farm worker issues, finds most of the bill a thin veil for racism and will only hurt the country and people trying to make a living.
"Since the overwhelming majority of undocumented workers are Hispanic, there is considerable concern among them," he said. "They're concerned that they're being targeted for something that is a power struggle between the state and federal government."
During 2007, immigration legislation failed in Congress while at least 1,500 pieces of state legislation involving immigration issues were introduced across the country. About 245 became law in 46 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Many state bills are being challenged in court, and others are hard to enforce.
Juan Carlos Chavez, a 32-year-old undocumented immigrant from Quintana Roo, Mexico, was one of several men waiting for work along North Charleston's Ashley Phosphate Road Wednesday afternoon. Chavez hadn't worked in a week, and the pay has been low with the recent economic downturn, but going back home wasn't appealing.
"I can't go back to Mexico with my hands empty," he said in Spanish.
Like many others, Chavez gave up what little he had to cross the border. He arrived in South Carolina about eight months ago. He repeated a refrain common among his countrymen seeking work in the U.S.: "We just want to work."
If the state starts cracking down on businesses that hire undocumented workers, Chavez supposed that jobs would dry up.
"Then I would have to immigrate somewhere else," he said.
Directed at businesses that hire illegal immigrants, the reform package would also require public contractors to verify the legal status of their employees through a federal work authorization program. If the contractors were caught knowingly employing illegal immigrants, they would be penalized 5 percent of the contract's value.
Rep. Joe Neal, D-Hopkins, said the state wasn't serious about stopping illegal immigration because if it were, the legislation would have called for contractors employing illegal workers to lose the government's business or be forced to fire the employees. He called the bill "feel-good" legislation.
"It's a sham," Neal said. "It's a pretense, It's a joke. It's not honest. ...
"We're giving a wink and a nod and calling the public blind mules because they don't understand the game that's being played."
Harrell called Neal's comments "absurd." During about three hours of debate on the House floor, members, mostly Democrats, attempted to poke holes in the bill. Supporters, though, argued that it was the best the state could do given that border enforcement, deportation and most other immigration-control measures are under federal jurisdiction.
In conjunction with the immigration reform package, the House also gave key approval to a resolution by Rep. Leon Stavrinakis, D-Charleston, that directs the state to take any legal action possible to recover from the federal government money the state has spent on illegal immigrants.
The Senate also issued a call Wednesday for a constitutional convention that would allow the states, if 33 others states signed on, to amend the constitution only as it pertains to illegal immigration. The House will have to sign on to the resolution before it could be sent to Washington.
Gov. Mark Sanford commended the House for taking action after earlier this week asking the Legislature to address immigration during their first 30 days back in session.
"Since Washington has failed to act on this issue, I think that as a state we have to be very clear about not creating incentives for illegal behavior," Sanford said in a statement.
"As we've long said, the ultimate fix for this problem will have to come from Washington, but this bill is a step forward and I'd urge both the House and Senate to get it to my desk as soon as possible."
How they voted
The House voted 88-23 to approve the immigration reform package.
Here's a look at how Charleston-area lawmakers voted for the bill:
Republicans for: Dantzler, Goose Creek; Hagood, Sullivan's Island; Harrell, Charleston; Hutson, Summerville; Limehouse, Charleston; Merrill, Daniel Island; Scarborough, James Island; Umphlett, Moncks Corner; and Young, Summerville.
Republicans against: None
Democrats for: Knight, St. George; Miller, Pawleys Island; and Stavrinakis, Charleston.
Democrats against: Breeland, Charleston; Brown, Hollywood; Jefferson, Pineville; and Mack, North Charleston.
Not voting: Whipper, D-North Charleston.
More on reform
Additional House reform measures:
--Require magistrates to consider legal status when setting bonds.
--Allow victims of identify theft by illegal immigrants to sue.
--Prohibit any state county or municipality from failing to enforce state law.
--Bar illegal immigrants from attending any state-supported college or university in South Carolina and stop them from receiving any state-sanctioned scholarships or benefits toward private colleges or universities.
--Stop illegal immigrants from receiving public benefits provided by taxpayer funds. Certain exceptions, such as disaster relief, criminal domestic violence services and emergency medical services, will not be affected.
Noah Haglund contributed to this report. Reach Yvonne Wenger at (803) 799-9051 or ywenger@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story 
Printer-friendly version
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Post and Courier does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our Web site.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Comments
This article has 41 comment(s)
Posted by dustym on January 31, 2008 at 4:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Said it before,now again.I just left Louisville Ky. to do a large construction project...guess what,no mexicans,Guatamalans,just black and white,legals.
What does KY. know???????????
Posted by ironhorse on January 31, 2008 at 6:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Juan Carlos Chavez, good idea, immigrate somewhere else! Arizona will take you in, just ask McCain.
Posted by hrumphgrumble on January 31, 2008 at 7 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Not hard to figure out which side of this issue this reporter is on-it takes her biased ass six paragraphs to get to the description of the bill. I really don't care what this bimbo thinks. This kind of reporting is what happens when you keep promoting mediocrity in the name of gender preferences and quotas.
Posted by Hey_U_Guys on January 31, 2008 at 7:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think the bill is a wonderful idea. I'm sick and tired of illegal immigrants.
Posted by jefferymaier on January 31, 2008 at 7:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Instead of making it a felony to harbour an illegal, whay not make it a felony to employ the illegal? Answer is, politicians are bought and paid for by business. Nothing will change.
Posted by crankyyankee on January 31, 2008 at 7:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Give me a break, everyone knows Americans want amnesty for illegals or they wouldn’t be voting for the leadership supporting it. Every candidate left running is pro amnesty. Judging from the voting thus far we also like taxes, welfare and war. I’m glad I’m not a child today that will be strapped with future social security, national health care, foreign debt and public assistance costs of the near future. Your children will pay a dear price for our decisions!
Posted by carolinadude on January 31, 2008 at 8:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Jeffrey Maier,
You're right, it's apparent that bobby harrell and his crony state reps are "of the chamber, for the chamber and by the chamber". Will this sham artist have opposition in June. I seriosly doubt it.
Posted by carlosthedwarf on January 31, 2008 at 8:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Bottom line is that illegal means "against the law" and if anyone wants to come to the United States they should come here legally. I don't care if they're from Mexico, Guatemala, Guadalajara, Guadalcanal, whatever. And if you're going to come to this country then you should assimilate with the rest of Americans. You can still be proud of your homeland and your culture, but you should also appreciate the freedoms and liberties offered to you in the United States of America.
Posted by carlosthedwarf on January 31, 2008 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's interesting to me how so many people are willing to criticize McCain for supporting illegals when Mike Huckabee did the same thing in Arkansas yet the silence is deafening.
Posted by whome on January 31, 2008 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Because of the hole that we put ourselves in, the only practical solution is for amnesty first, then enforcing immigration policy. With the economy the way that it is, and the fact that we have an upside-down population pyramid, does any politician really want to face the impact of 1) decreased consumer demand; 2) increased producer costs; and 3) the logistics of deporting 12-20 million individuals with all of the due process concerns.
Posted by charlene68 on January 31, 2008 at 8:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I personally dont think it is going to get through the 3 step it might make 2 but dont think 3 ,, it is like Harpo said... To me it is not strong enough and to many holes in it .. but... again we will see where it goes
Posted by captivated on January 31, 2008 at 8:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Allow victims of identity theft by illegal immigrants to sue. TO SUE WHO? And what would we recover from an illegal immigrant? Some of our lawmakers need to grow a pair!
Posted by theronce on January 31, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We are killing (aborting) over one million American consumers and laborers a year. So, we may actually need this boost of relatively young consumers and laborers. However, what fool is going to let any stranger that passes by have the run of his house. No law or plan will work without first securing the border. It must then include a mechanism and funding to accomplish enforcement.
Posted by RTC on January 31, 2008 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is a step in the right direction, but this bill definitely needs some modifications.
Part makes no sense, and part is too ambiguous.
As far as calling it racial, I don't see that. They are talking about people being illegal not being of a certain race.
I hope that they can fine tune this law a little better than this.
Posted by Strider on January 31, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
That's it! I'm renouncing my citizenship and going illegal. Now I can kick back and watch the government money come rolling in! Viva American!
Americano es stupidio!
Posted by southerngirl24 on January 31, 2008 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Since the overwhelming majority of undocumented workers are Hispanic, there is considerable concern among them," he said. "They're concerned that they're being targeted for something that is a power struggle between the state and federal government."
Or maybe they are being targeted because they are here ILLEGALLY! If you are that concerned, go someplace else or go back home and work LEGALLY.
Posted by CMLMADDOG on January 31, 2008 at 9:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You go, southerngirl24! :)
Posted by crankyyankee on January 31, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
All I can say is where were all of you the Saturday before last when the majority if South Carolina voted Deomocrat? The posters here are obviously a very small minority. So you are either out of touch, didn't vote or just a few political rebels. Your not going to like Nov 4th this year!
Posted by justtryin2survive on January 31, 2008 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"some immigration advocates find the state legislation a thin veil for racism" Can someone please tell me how you get racism out of ILLEGAL??????????????? Illegal is Illegal it means get the f out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by YankeeLady on January 31, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The problem is two-fold: you have illegal immigrants who come here for jobs that provide more than what they can find in their own countries; many of these folks are very hard-working, trying to support their families. For the privilege and right to work here, they should register for work permits and contribute through a fee or tax to local governments providing services to them. The companies and individuals who hire them take advantage of the situation, and get away with paying them wages far lower than the average legal citizen would accept, fattening the corporate bottom line. Why can't employers who benefit from this illegal labor be made to pay into a fund towards healthcare and social services that their workers use while in this country? After all, they're benefiting from this source of cheap labor at the expense of the tax-paying middle class. Of course, government wouldn't dare to ask businesses to cut into their profits; after all, that's who keeps these politicians in office.
Posted by WSMcDaniel on January 31, 2008 at 10:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Who needs soveriegnty? Why, our betters are in office to take care of us! Why, the Constitution was written by white, slaveowning heterosexual males. In fact, women weren't allowed to vote. Why don't we just go ahead with the North American Union and have a bunch of unelected people tell us what to do like they do in Brussels with the EU? We could be all kinds of multicultural, then! I swoon at the thought!
Yeah, right. Soveriegnty is racist, now? Racism has been the red herring argument against opposition to Socialism since Lennin was around.
The Democrats want a new perpetual victim class for the votes, and the Republicans want the cheap labor (neo-slavery from the party of Lincoln, no less!).
It is time to clean house at the local, state, and national level and wipe the place clean with the Constitution! I want my country back, and am tired of seeing my future and that of my children given away by the Democrats and sold to the highest (foriegn) bidder by the Republicans.
Posted by lookyhere on January 31, 2008 at 11:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is very unfair to all the immigrants who are here legally and trying to gain citizenship, If I have to go through all the right channels - (proving I am an upstanding person,paid my taxes,no criminal background etc..) then so should they! The fact that they are here illegally should say something in itself! you wanna be here then pay all the back taxes you owe to the U.S. , go through background checks, and at the very least know the damn language!
Posted by skyguy51 on January 31, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't know how much more I can stand being "have the SC House respond to what their constituents said". This bill is a sham. I hope the Senate either fixes it or kills it.
Posted by AFWally on January 31, 2008 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Its not an immigration issue..... its a mass invasion of people who don't belong here......we "the people" have a right to defend our homeland.....lock and load.
Posted by Girleygirl on January 31, 2008 at 11:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Senate should kill it....sound like they are trying to satisfy everyone with this bill and its no winners nor losers.
Excuse me the only losers are the citizens since this is just a pacifier type bill...
Posted by outrage on January 31, 2008 at 12:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by YankeeLady (anonymous) on January 31, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The companies and individuals who hire them take advantage of the situation, and get away with paying them wages far lower than the average legal citizen would accept,
Some of these illegals won't work for less than $10 an hour,so you need to get a new argument.
I had a friend who hired a contractor to add an addition and this contractor had illegals doing the sheetrock(drywall for you yanks) and it was pathetic work.
SEND THEM ALL HOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by crankyyankee on January 31, 2008 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What's really funny about the whole thing is that most of these interlopers don't want to be citizens of this country and I can't blame them. The citizens of this Country are the ones who will be strapped with the tax bill. Why would anyone want to be part of that?
Posted by outrage on January 31, 2008 at 1:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Press #1 for English, #2 for Spanish, #3 for Arabic, #4 for Farsi, #5 for Russian etc. etc. etc.
Posted by Chief_SittingBull on January 31, 2008 at 1:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
More ineffective legislation which lets employers and law makers “off the hook” and continue to add to the problems while making it easy to blame the immigrants for immigration problems…great!
If employers, and in some cases lawmakers, were properly penalized the illegal immigration problem would not be that much of a 'problem'any more.
Posted by forget on January 31, 2008 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
These people are here for the $$$ only. They are not interested in becoming Americans. They send most of their money to their home, so therefore, it isn't being brought back into the economy. Their children are in our public schools. How? I was required to show birth certificate, etc. to get mine in. They are bankrupting our hospitals. They are committing crimes, and we are having to spend $$$ prosecuting and then jailing them. And on top of that, they are receiving government assistance (WIC vouchers, etc.) Entire sections of cities are turning into something like "Little Tiajuana". Look at Goose Creek near the weapons station. That used to be where alot of our military lived (myself included), can't go there now.
I can name a half dozen employers off the top of my head that employ them. They have phony SS cards, and therefore, they have phony names. When they get arrested for driving violations, they give this name. Tomorrow, they have another name they'll use untill....
Something has to be done. We have to take a hard stand and forget about being PC.
Posted by JohnS on January 31, 2008 at 2:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Senior Juan McCain will override the state once he is in office.
Posted by forget on January 31, 2008 at 2:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The name of that company would just get lost among all the others. They don't necessarily work for less, but employers aren't paying SS and Medicaid, or unemployment contributions. Which adds up if you have 25 or so hired. On top of that, the work being performed is sub par. Remember the Lennar( correct me if this is the wrong co) homes in Westcott that should never had passed inspections? Well, the contractors have hired all these illegals to do the work. You can bet that they don't have these kind of inspections on buildings in Mexico, Guatamala, etc.
Had to go to the emergency room awhile back, found myself waiting my turn that came after about 4 illegals. They couldn't speak english, needed a translator. They didn't even sign out after they were finished, they just walked out. Who's going to pay that one?
Posted by eyfigueroa on January 31, 2008 at 3:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm heartened by the fact that almost everyone on this board today is in some sort of agreement. Reps. Harrell and McConnell only want to pander to the hard core ignoramuses who hate the Hispanic horde but don't know squat about the REAL issues at hand.
This bill is all for show. There’s no real legislation here:
• no real enforcement of current laws
• no incentive for employers to do the right thing
• no true criminal or civil consequences
Also, no state funded benefits for illegals? What about the children that are born here of illegal parents? Our constitution gives ALL born on US soil citizenship, how will this legislation affect them? These kids go to our schools and they need immunizations and regular health checkups so they don’t spread communicable diseases to other kids in schools. So in essence, unless the state govt. plans on confiscating these babies at birth and putting them in foster care or orphanages, giving benefits to them gives benefits to the family. Food stamps and WIC vouchers are federal benefits and eligibility criteria are set at the federal level (illegals are already barred from getting Food Stamps), so this “no state benefits clause” is actually a crock of crap. Everything illegals get are either federally mandated (medical care) or have federal requirements (food stamps).
The ONLY way to stem this tide:
• is to quickly and fiercely punish those who employ them.
• Force a high tariff on outgoing money transfers
• English speaking/written forms in ALL government offices (to include drivers license testing)
• Push for changes to federal statutes regarding public benefits
This bill is just pandering at the highest level.
Posted by JohnS on January 31, 2008 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All homes built in Westcott are built under the supervision of lic contrators. This is how they pass inspection. The supervisor just needs to make sure the work is up to min code otherwise a certificate of occ will not be issued by the county.
Posted by forget on January 31, 2008 at 4:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You're correct that the homes are built under a licensed contractor, it's who they're hiring to get the jobs done is the problem. But, there are some people there with some serious problems with their homes. Didn't the news report mention that there were too few inspectors to do the job the way it is supposed to be done? Just saying, one problem causes another and so on...
Posted by KidYendor on January 31, 2008 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Please make a note that according to this story Rep. David Mack (D) for N. Charleston House District 109 voted against this immigration reform package. He should be voted out come election time. Shame on you David Mack.
Posted by lisagary on January 31, 2008 at 4:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We're going to be building a house this year, and I was wondering whether we can have some provision built into the construction agreement regarding punishment of any subcontractor who knowingly hires illegals. We want only legal American citizen workers, or folks who have a documented legal right to work in the US, building it, and we want the subcontractor(s) to be monetarily liable for going against our specific instructions. In addition, I will be visiting the jobsite daily, and will report any suspected illegals to ICE. Any attorneys posting here who can advise if we are within our legal rights to do this (specify the citizenship of workers in our construction agreement)?
Posted by moonpie on January 31, 2008 at 5:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
feel-good" legislation that's all it is.
PalmettoMan I too am a registered republican and couldn't agree with you more, this is an outrage. I really thought they were going to pass meaningful legislation.
REMEMBER THIS WHEN YOU VOTE PEOPLE. I DON'T CARE WHO RUNS AGAINST MY STATE CONGRESS PERSON I WILL VOTE FOR THEM! EVEN IF IT MEANS VOTING FOR A DEMOCRAT. HELL YOU CAN'T TELL THEM APART ANYMORE!
Posted by outrage on January 31, 2008 at 6:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by archdude (anonymous) on January 31, 2008 at 5:07 p.m.
*This answer is based upon one part of my family owning a large construction company for the past 100 years.
This might explain your handle "archdude", are you an architect. If so, why not use "flying buttress". It was my favorite architectural term in college. LOL : - )
Posted by carolinadude on January 31, 2008 at 7:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"whome" sounds to me like a lobbyist for the chamber. If not, maybe a lawyer legislator. HEAVEN HELP US ALL!
Posted by watsgoinon on February 11, 2008 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
While our lawmakers are dragging their feet, jobs are being lost to illegal immigrants.
How can it be that South Carolina government is blind? Illegals send their money back to Mexico. Americans spend their money HERE.
How stupid is our politicians? We will find out...hopefully before it is to late.