Speech #980211578

So the question is: Do we apply that to all employers similarly situation around the country. or just those who have already had some finding by the Attorney General that they have already violated the law? If we are going to talk about various interests involved. I would suggest. for instance. the agricultural community might be interested in this. because it is my judgment that if the bill stands as it is. the natural tendency of the INS would be to go where they have found the most number of illegal aliens in the smallest piece of territory. and that is in agriculture. Even though only 15 percent of all those who are here illegally working are in agriculture and 85 percent are nonagriculturalrelated jobs. agriculture would be the focus. because it would be the easiest way to go to find people who violated the law in the first instance and impose that obligation on them and not everywhere else. It seem to me that one of the things we are trying to do in this bill is have fairness throughout. There are illegal aliens working and being victimized in sweatshops around this country and in factories. as well as at agricultural locations. and it seems to me that we ought to be concerned about that. A mandatory employee verification process. in my judgment. provides an essential safeguard against invidious discrimination. Examination of the readily accessible existing identifiers provides the employer with an objective basisnot subjective. such as how you look. whether you have an accent. where were you from originallybut an objective basis for determining employee eligibility in place of the alternative reliance on subjective factors.