{"id":165,"date":"2011-06-17T10:20:54","date_gmt":"2011-06-17T14:20:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=165"},"modified":"2015-08-21T11:32:22","modified_gmt":"2015-08-21T15:32:22","slug":"immigration-enforcers-differ-on-e-verify-bill","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2011\/06\/17\/immigration-enforcers-differ-on-e-verify-bill\/","title":{"rendered":"Immigration Enforcers Differ on E-Verify Bill"},"content":{"rendered":"

In separate articles, two experts on the immigration debate take opposing views of Rep. Lamar Smith’s (R-TX) E-Verify bill that is being debated in Congress.<\/p>\n

In his article on the New York Post<\/a>, Kris Kobach, the current Kansas Secretary of State and co-author of the Arizona and Alabama immigration enforcement bills, says that while the Smith bill sounds good, in fact, it hobbles immigration enforcement as it was negotiated with the pro-amnesty US Chamber of Commerce and would establish a fairly toothless E-Verify requirement while defanging the only government bodies that are serious about enforcing immigration law — the states.<\/p>\n

However, Mark Krikorian, head of the Center for Immigration Studies, in an article on National Review Online<\/a> says that Mr. Kobach’s objections to the Smith bill, though real, just aren’t serious enough to outweigh the benefits of the legislation, adding that concessions in the bill aren’t a big thing to give away in exchange for all employers in all states to use E-Verify in hiring.<\/p>\n

What do you think about their differing views and of the push for a national E-Verify program?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In separate articles, two experts on the immigration debate take opposing views of Rep. Lamar Smith’s (R-TX) E-Verify bill that is being debated in Congress. In his article on the New York Post, Kris Kobach, the current Kansas Secretary of State and co-author of the Arizona and Alabama immigration enforcement bills, says that while the<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":37,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[11,6,4],"tags":[162],"yst_prominent_words":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/37"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=165"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":171,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165\/revisions\/171"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=165"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=165"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=165"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=165"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}