April 4, 2008
Comments on DHS SSA No-Match Rule Needed
On Wednesday, March 26th, DHS published it's proposed No-Match rule in the Federal Register. Although they did make small changes, they have basically re-submitted the same flawed rule which was preliminarily enjoined by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in September of last year.
We now have less then 30 days to submit comments and let DHS know we oppose their rule. We need to generate as many comments as we can. The deadline to submit comments is April 25, that's only a little more then 3 weeks away. We need to act now. Please forward this message as widely as possible.
Several model comments are posted on the LWIW website and instructions on how to submit comments. Spanish comments will be available soon.
Click here for National Immigration Law Center's Talking Points about the new Supplemental Proposed Rule
Summary of the DHS Supplemental Rule on No-Match Letters
Facts About the Social Security "No-Match" Letter
Click here for a copy of DHS' Proposed Rule
If you have any questions please contact Mike Munoz at firstname.lastname@example.org.
April 4, 2008 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Comments on DHS SSA No-Match Rule Needed:
It seems that the alleged no-match problem is nowhere near the problem that you open borders folks claim (or is it hoped?) it to be. It's amazing how empircism often trumps hysterical popaganda based upon wishful thinking. However, I have faith that you'll continue distorting the truth to support your agenda, as you've done with the false claim of higher hate crimes against Hispanics.
This from the Tucson Citizen:
Employers have screened about 2.5 million new hires in the first six months of fiscal 2008 through E-Verify, the Department of Homeland Security's database that determines which employees can legally work in the U.S. This compares to 3.3 million in fiscal 2007 and 1.7 million in fiscal 2006, according to the department.
Arizona mandated that all businesses use E-Verify starting Jan. 1, and fewer problems have been reported than originally feared, said Ann Seiden, spokeswoman for the state Chamber of Commerce that opposed the measure in the legislature last year.
Companies haven't left the state in reaction to E-Verify, she said, and employers haven't reported major problems with the database.
"Anecdotally, we haven't heard as much backlash as we originally thought," Seiden said. "Although it's mandatory, there are a lot of businesses not using it yet."
Posted by: Horace | Apr 5, 2008 5:52:34 PM