Panel Rejects Bigger Illegal Hiring Fines

Business interests won a key concession on immigration reform Wednesday as the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected an effort to significantly raise fines for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

The panel’s vote to strike the stiffer penalties from the Senate’s immigration bill adds to a string of legislative victories for business that critics say are taking some of the teeth out of immigration reform.

“I don’t think we have to fine them in an exorbitant way,” said Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), an opponent of any employer sanctions at all. “What happens is that small business gets slapped and they just turn away people with foreign-sounding names and appearances.”

The fines would have more than doubled from current levels, which now range from $250 to $10,000 for each illegal immigrant hired.

Since the 1986 immigration law made it illegal for employers to hire undocumented workers, businesses have complained that they are effectively being turned into federal agents because of the government’s inability to enforce the law.

Using their lobbying clout, business groups have joined forces with an odd mix of allies, from the Christian Coalition to the National Council of La Raza, in opposing various aspects of immigration reform. In fine-tuning its bill for a vote by the full Senate next month, the Judiciary Committee Wednesday also struck provisions from the bill that would have allowed the federal government to seize the property of employers who violate immigration law.

Another section that did not survive would have sent employer fines directly to the Immigration and Naturalization Service budget, creating a sort of “bounty” for each violator the agency caught.

Last week, in another business victory, Sen. Alan K. Simpson (R-Wyo.), the bill’s sponsor, agreed to drop reductions in the number of foreign workers allowed into the country, a key sticking point with business.

Both the House and Senate have bowed to widespread opposition to a worker verification program that would force employers to tap into a government database to check on the immigration status of prospective workers.

The last-minute changes, especially the toned-down worker verification measures, infuriate those pushing for the toughest crackdown possible.

“Business is losing by winning,” said Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley), a strong proponent of worker verification. “What has happened is that there is a tremendous amount of misinformation out there among business people.”

Under current law, Gallegly argues, business owners cannot determine whether they are hiring illegal immigrants because of authentic-looking fraudulent documents. It is in their interest, he said, to rely on a better system to check new hires.

Still up in the air is a proposal to let agricultural firms sponsor temporary guest workers. The controversial provision was proposed by farmers, particularly from California, who fear that illegal immigration restrictions would drastically reduce their labor supply.

There are already provisions in current law allowing growers to sponsor temporary foreign workers, but critics call the program overly cumbersome. The proposed change, suggested by Rep. Richard W. Pombo (R-Tracy), would make such sponsorship quicker and easier and would temporarily withhold 25% of the salary of the visiting workers to ensure that they return home.