On Illegal Immigration

Illegal immigration is a problem in South Dakota.

Doug Schmitt, former chief of police of Huron, lost his job because he testified about the problem in the legislature.

From Keloland

The police chief in Huron is on administrative leave after making controversial comments to a state senate committee.

Doug Schmitt was testifying in favor of a bill Monday morning that would make it a state crime to hire illegal immigrants. He told lawmakers he knew of employers in the area who had knowingly hired illegal workers.

Soon after he resigned.  However that is not the end….

From Keloland, April 27

There’s a movement in Huron to recall the city’s mayor.

Some people think he made the former chief of police Doug Schmitt resign after he testified in favor of a bill cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. They placed him on administrative leave last month and he later resigned.

There’s a group of people saying Schmitt had his right to freedom of speech violated when the city took the action it did. So they’re now trying to gather nearly 1300 signatures needed to call a vote to remove Mayor Dave McGirr from office.

and that attempt failed (from July 5)

An effort to recall Huron Mayor Dave McGirr has ended because petition circulators didn’t collect enough valid signatures.

City Finance Officer Paullyn Carey reported that 344 signatures were declared invalid, dropping the number of valid ones to 1,128 – 139 short of the number needed to prompt a recall election.

Many questions still remain about the entire incident.  (I hope to cover some of them in future postings)

There are people losing their lives at the hands of illegal aliens.

The prosecution of a man who could face the death penalty if convicted of killing a South Dakota teenager might be complicated by his Mexican citizenship.

Authorities say 21-year-old Alexander Salgado was working illegally in the U.S. when 16-year-old Jasmine Guevara of Mitchell was killed.

The federal government steadfastly refuses to properly address the situation.  In light of federal inaction the states have an obligation to act, if for no other reason then to protect it citizens from an unknown threat.

Following the lead of Arizona, Nebraska, Georgia, and others several bills were introduced in the legislature this past session, most notably HB 1198 and SB 156.  Both of these bills were flawed, and shouldn’t of passed in their ‘final’ form.  That is part of the purpose of committees is to amend,  modify and make the the bill perfect before passing.  The commitees failed to properly address the situation.  There are several legislators who plan to put forth new bills this next session.

We want to make sure that the bill we pass doesn’t have unintended consequences, like throwing nuns or Red Cross workers in prison for providing humanitarian aid.

There are some who believe that having businesses ‘import’ workers, can be good for the economy.   Because the workers that are imported will work for less, and do work that other people just don’t want to do, thus keeping the businesses operating.

From Lee Schoenbeck:

I am still waiting to hear who you(Stace Nelson) and (Rep.)Manny think are going to power our substantial dairy industry in South Daktoa. My kids and your kids, my neighbors and your neighbors, are not the ones who want to work in the dairies ? long hours and a permanent stench you can?t scrub off ? to keep the industry working. There are thousands of jobs in this state dependant on people that aren?t supposed to be here.

that was answered by Spencer:

Unfortunately, growing up in Veblen, I witnessed firsthand what increased dependence on an imported workforce ultimately leads to. When the Veblen dairy started, a sizeable majority of the workers were locals. The pay was not great, but it was good enough to attract people to Veblen to work there. Over the years the dairy increased its employment of immigrants. Immigrants were packed into homes throughout town. Rundown trailer homes were brought in to make room for more families. The dairy eventually became solely fixated on ways of getting the cheapest work force possible regardless of the consequences. Presently, over 90 percent of the employees of the dairy are immigrants. Veblen produces close to 15 percent of the milk in South Dakota. The workforce associated with the dairy has become an exclusive class of workers separated in almost every imaginable way from the local population only further alienating the dairy from the very people who founded it. Currently, immigrant workers are being moved into apartments adjacent to the dairies making the positions almost exclusively tolerable to only foreign-born migrant workers desperate enough to work there.

I see three major problems here.

  1. I don’t have a problem with immigration itself, our nation was built on immigrants.  I in no way hold a grudge against someone looking for a better life for  themselves and their family.  We have a way to enter our nation, a way so we can keep criminals out  If we open our boarders and let anyone and everyone in, yes have lots of cheap labor.  What else are we letting in, drug dealers, thieves, rapists, murderers?
  2. With all these ‘new’ people, they will put more demand on our already strained social support systems. There are times we provide medical services, food, shelter to non-citizens all the while veterans go homeless, hungry, and denied medical care they need.  We should be taking care of our heroes, long before we try to take care of everyone else’s ‘cast-offs.’
  3. Our economy takes a beating.  One of the things our economy needs to keep going is to have people spend money, locally.  Migrant workers (legal or illegal) will spend what they must for food and shelter, however, the bulk of their pay gets sent back to support their family.  We need a few more of those dollars to stay right here, and be spent on things here.

Getting back to Lee Schoenbeck idea that illegal immigrants do jobs that many Americans won’t do unless there is a whole lot more $$$ involved.  Lee may have touched on a social ill that there is no quick fix for.  We have to learn to live within our own personal means.  When I quit/lost my job for a year,  I fully understood that the next position would be less glamorous, and for less pay.  There seems to be this feeling within our country that everyone should have a great job, with great pay.  I had to start  at the bottom of the totem pole and work my way up.  If I can do it, then anyone can.  Work in a dairy, walking beans, working in a hog barn, or even digging ditches is great charter building experiences,  from what I have seen recently many of our  ‘leaders’ need to spend a couple of week on a dairy farm.

Whatever bill comes out of the legislature that deals with the illegal immigration problem, if I am to support it must:

  1. Focus on the employers.  Illegal immigrants come here looking for jobs.  We need to take that away from them, at the same time make these jobs available to Americans.
  2. It has to have some real teeth.  Make the punishment so severe that any caught hiring an illegal immigrant could face bankruptcy or worse. I have no qualm charging these employers with treason.
  3. When all is said and done, illegal immigrants are human beings, and they should be treated as such.  They should be treated with basic respect.  They did what they felt they had to do what they did to  ensure their family survives.  Many of them faced a horrible journey to get here.  We shouldn’t make that any worse.  They should not be loaded into cattle cars and shipped across the country.  They should be provided with the basics, then sent back to their home country at their cost.

We need to get a handle on this immigration problem quickly.  I truely fear what may happen if we don’t.

82 Replies to “On Illegal Immigration”

  1. Bill Fleming

    Treason? Against the State of South Dakota I presume? How do you define treason, MC? Please enlighten us.

  2. I Wanna Be Elected. . . Alice

    So, just wondering out loud if any of the rejected signatures were from unregistered voters. . .perhaps illegals. . .perhaps otherwise undoucumented in the community. . .non-voters. . .Gee, seems to me that the irony shouldn’t be lost in this topic.

  3. Spencer

    Bringing in immigrants to do low paying jobs, does not directly hurt people with an education background or skills (I am not going to address the drain on services). It does, however, put a squeeze on low-income workers elevating the unemployment rate among the lower working class. Reference my Veblen Dairy post from the legislator voting thread. The Veblen Dairy initially hired a large majority of local workers. An immigrant workforce was not needed to make a large-scale dairy operation successful.

    1. MC Post author

      Interesting idea. However, for that to work Mexico has to want to be a state, and we would want them as a state.

      1. larrykurtz

        Imagine a smart, conservative voter base with an economy slightly larger than California?s with two Senators and the requisite number of House members. We need a specialist in State enabling acts who can draft an invitation from the American people to the Mexican people to hold a referendum that would dissolve their constitution and petition for Statehood.

        The geopolitical ramifications would be revolutionary. After that, include the provinces of Canada, then Central America and Cuba.

        The US Constitution is the finest instrument ever created by the human hand. Migration should be celebrated, not outlawed.

        1. MC Post author

          I have no problem with people come to America to find a better life, or even work for a short spell. We need some idea who is coming. are we getting hard workers who work for a little coin, or are we getting people who want to kill all of us?

          1. Bill Fleming

            MC, yes. It would be nice to know that. By the same token, it would be nice to know that about people who are born here too. Good luck getting that info.

  4. Stace Nelson

    I am bringing a bill, that I wanted to bring this year, next session. The first draft was not where we wanted it and we are tailoring it to SD based off the Legal Arizona Workers Act that has already been upheld by SCOTUS. This bill will be as close to those upheld portions, while being domestic to SD, as possible. SCOTUS’ ruling make the arguments moot that the state does not have jursidiction in this area, or a right to address the problem.




    If you wish to correspond on this matter/post, please address your inquiry to rep.nelson@state.sd.us

    1. Bill Fleming

      Mr. Nelson, how many undocumented workers do you think are working at the Veblin dairy? None? 1%? 10%? 50%? What’s your estimate?

      1. Spencer

        Nobody really knows how many undocumented workers are working there because that is information employers all too frequently do not want to look into. If the 2008 raid on the Veblen Dairy is any indication of current numbers of existing problems with the workforce, it could be a rather large number: http://articles.aberdeennews.com/2008-10-30/news/26416802_1_immigration-raid-immigration-violations-veblen

        Notice how these were people apparently apprehended through violations not necessarily associated with the dairy, but oddly enough a large number of the people that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement were interested in just happened to turn up at the Veblen Dairy.

        One thing about the whole immigration issue that I find ironic is the extent to which liberals are undercutting their own agenda with loose borders and enforcement. The previous owner of the Veblen Dairy, Rick Millner, had to be one of the biggest crooks in South Dakota history, yet the nature of the workforce provided to him through our lax immigration laws allowed him to abuse his workers, the company, and the local environment as he saw fit. Propping up thugs like Rick Millner is counter to anything liberals hold dear about worker rights and environmental protections: http://c4bsl.org/index.php?rub=page&id=30

        On a larger scale, immigration has been a huge drain on our entitlement spending. Medicaid spending in this state is through the roof. Even with steep cuts to education, we are still spending millions every year for ESL and ELL programs. The Sioux Falls school district alone has at least 26 staff members devoted to addressing this one issue: http://www.sf.k12.sd.us/index.php?option=com_staffdirectory&view=result&Itemid=87 A teacher is going to run you roughly $40,000+ a head including benefits. Suddenly, paying an extra dime or quarter on various types of produce to have Americans produce it does not seem so bad in comparison.

        What has the Left gained through lax immigration enforcement? They have successfully increased the size of a key electoral demographic while also successfully gutting entitlements, empowering corrupt corporate owners, and ravaging the environment. Congratulations!

        1. Bill Fleming

          From Spencer:
          “If the 2008 raid on the Veblen Dairy is any indication of current numbers of existing problems with the workforce…”

          From the article:
          “The 27 arrests are incorrectly being described as an immigration raid on dairy facilities in the Veblen area, Counts said. Most of the arrests were made at dairy buildings in Veblen because that’s where many of the people worked, but not because the dairy was being raided, he said.”

          That’s an old link, Spencer. Do you know how it turned out. How many of the 27 people detained were actually illegal?

          Do you know how many people work at the dairy?

          1. Spencer

            Yes, all of those arrested were let go on non-criminal charges. It was determined that the administrative oversight by immigration and customs and the dairy along with past employers was so lax and negligent that it could not be determined whether the workers had actually committed fraud or identity theft or that their lapsed and inaccurate work visas were actually immigration violations. Evidently, if no one is actually enforcing a law, no one is breaking it, either. One wonders how anyone is actually deported or brought up on criminal charges considering we have employers who don’t care that work visas are inaccurate, out of date, and lapsed and that we apparently have an immigration and customs that is either unwilling or unable to enforce the existing work visa program in a timely fashion. Since the East and West Dairy now combine to employ nearly 200 employees and that immigration and customs only bothered to follow up on the leads that they had going in from previous investigations, how would they ever catch a systemic employment problem when they do not bother looking for one? If the 27 arrested were let off because no one bothered to document or enforce anything, what can be said of the remaining 100+ that work there?

      2. Stace Nelson

        Well, if a person is working there, logically there is documentation to that effect as well as the specific personal identification offered by those persons in order to accomplish that feat… So, 0. If you are asking me if and how many illegal aliens are employed there, I would point you to others that posted previously as to their knowledge of such things within that facility and sector of our state economy. As persons knowledgably of this problem, how many illegal aliens do you fell are illegally employed in SD?

        Sorry for delayed response, was not hiding, just gone these last couple days.

        1. anonymous

          I don’t care if people misspell on blogs, but you use knowledgably incorrectly. Maybe that’s why you couldn’t get the thing written.

          1. Stace Nelson

            You caught me, large ham hands, fat fingers flailing the keyboard, and multi tasking distracted eyes. Should have read “As a person knowledgeable of this problem..”

            Glad you “don?t care if people misspell on blogs” though… 😉

  5. J Rae

    This is a tough and complicated issue. Is there anything we could learn from what Georgia is going through with their new immigration laws?

  6. yoyoyoyoyo

    “The dairy eventually became solely fixated on ways of getting the cheapest work force possible regardless of the consequences.”

    Just capitalism at work baby! Dont fight it…

    1. Troy Jones

      You obviously suffer from Republican Derangement Syndrome. First, we get criticized by many for being to hard on the issue yet you live in a world where you cant get past your biases and believe we want more illegals. 😉

      1. MC Post author

        Republican Derangement Syndrome? Really? Is there a cure for that or can it just be supressed with meds?

        1. yoyoyoyoyo

          I’ll only take the meds if medicaid will cover them.

          There’s competing forces here…not wanting to illegal aliens in the country, which i understand, and wanting the cheapest labor force, which i also understand. Problem is these two groups can be one in the same. Although most manufacturing is overseas now anyway, so were only really left with AG type jobs over hear. Obviously its got to be more cost effective to keep those businesses located here, or they wouldnt be here.

          And really, whats legislation against hiring illegals going to accomplish? For one, are we going to creat another agency to police this? Two, if they are all paid as subcontractors there wont be any new hire reporting or anything anyway. Pretty sure you dont have to verify citizenship of contractors. 3 – there are allready federal guidelines requiring verificaiton of citizenship or right to work. Why doesnt someone report these businesses to the proper authorities?

          1. MC Post author

            We really don’t need new laws, what we need is to enforce the laws already in place.

            The Feds are either unwilling or unable, then the responsbility falls to the states, If the states fail to act, then it will fall to the counties, after that, some people may take action on their own. I hope it does get that far.

  7. duggersd

    I agree with punishing the employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants/aliens or whatever term you want to you. There also should be a penalty for a person who is not here legally. If caught, deportation seems in order. However, if employers find it is not a good idea to be caught knowingly hiring illegal immigrants, then the problem of deportation will take care of itself. I recall self-deportation happening in AZ and OK not too long ago. It is not very difficult to send in the information and if things do not m atch to ask the person to clear it up. If unable to clear it up, that person cannot work.

      1. duggersd

        Home country. Not rocket science. If the person is from Mexico, that person gets sent to Mexico. If the person is from Guatemala, that person gets sent to Guatemala. If the person is from Germany, that person gets sent back to Germany.
        I have friends in North Dakota.

    1. Bill Fleming

      Try “Undocumented workers.” Problem is, many ? if not most ? of the workers have proper documentation when they take the job. Many are here on tourist or work visas. So at the time of hire, they were properly documented. I know quite a few Americans who have lived in Mexico for decades under similar terms. The ones who live there and are properly documented return home to the states as per the conditions of their visas (green cards) and return as soon as possible. Some have dual citizenship by virtue of having married someone from Mexico. Some are living in Mexico “illegally.” The system works both ways.

      1. Spartan76

        How many Americans are living in Mexico illegally? Is it 25 – 30 million? Do they demand that school children be taught English? Do they demand that all government publications be printed in English? Do they show up at Hospital ER and be given free treatment?

          1. Spartan76

            The answer is probably, go home if you don’t like it here.

            The answer to medical care in Mexico, I do know. No Americans do not receive free health care when in Mexico.

              1. Spartan76

                Wonder why that is? Could it be that physicians do not have to charge all their patients an extra $55.00 per office call just to pay mal-practice insurance premiums? Thanks in part to all the ambulance chasing attorneys, particularly John Edwards. Could it be that they don’t have all the government regulation that all medical practices in the US are subject too?

                Just wondering. (I could go on, and on, and on)

                1. Spartan76

                  Bill said: All good questions. I don?t know any of the answers. Do you?

                  I Said: The answer to medical care in Mexico, I do know. No Americans do not receive free health care when in Mexico.

                  Bill Then Said:Correct. Just two or three times cheaper.

                  Thought you did not know the answers to the questions?


    One simple solution is to require employers do instant checks on new hires like they do gun purchasers. It isnt time consuming and it is very accurate. The Feds do not want to do anything so that isnt going to happen.

    1. yoyoyoyoyo

      checks where? There isn’t a national database of who is a citizen or not…states keep there own birth records which make them difficult. And employers are allready required to obtain passport or two other forms of Id on an I9 form for new employees.

      PRetty sure we have the laws in place they just need teeth.

  9. Bill Fleming

    By law, an employer can’t ask a person’s country of birth, but I think they CAN ask workers if can prove they are eligible to work in the United States.

    1. MC Post author

      Unless I am mistaken they have to produce various documentation to prove they can work in the United States.

    2. duggersd

      Not CAN. REQUIRED. The employee must produce a SS card, and some other forms of identification. Typically if there is a problem, the person is flagged by the SS Administration and told to straighten it out. If unable, the person cannot continue to legally work.

        1. duggersd

          I have 0 employees. I have taken jobs. When I take the job, I have to produce certain documents. Perhaps being self-employed you do not know this. I also know the law requires sending SS information in to the SS Administration. If you recall, that is how a certain candidate for the governor’s office got into trouble last year. Her employee had a discrepancy and all kinds of hell broke loose. How many employees do you have?

      1. Bill Fleming

        For DuggerSD’s edification (Having run my own studio for over 30 years, hired a LOT of people. I know how it works):

        What An Interviewer May Ask:
        1. Any information on the application for further review.

        2. Why the applicant left former employment.

        3. What kind of references the applicant would receive from former employers.

        4. What the applicant?s prior job duties consisted of.

        5. What the applicant liked or disliked about his/her prior job.

        6. What kind of job duties the applicant is interested in.

        7. What hours or days the applicant is available or unavailable to work.

        8. What the applicant feels, in terms of self-evaluation, are his/her strengths and weaknesses for the present job (also could be asked for prior jobs).

        9. Allow the applicant to mention and discuss what s/he feels is relevant to the job s/he is applying for.

        10. If the applicant was ever convicted of a felony.

        11. Whether the applicant has transportation to and from work.

        Don’t Ask? A Checklist of Questions to Avoid:

        Most smaller companies do not have full-time, trained human resources managers, and can easily get in trouble by asking illegal interview questions.

        Here are questions you cannot ask by law.

        1. Birthplace

        2. Birthplace of parents, spouse or other close relatives

        3. If applicant is a native or naturalized citizen

        4. Foreign languages that applicant reads, writes or speaks fluently

        5. How applicant acquired fluency in foreign languages

        6. Wife?s maiden name

        7. Mother?s maiden name

        These questions provide information about a candidate?s national origin and ethnic background. If the job requires fluency in a foreign language, question 4 is acceptable.

        8. Has applicant ever worked under another name

        9. Marital status

        10. Plans for marriage or pregnancy

        11. Number of children

        12. If applicant has child care problems

        13. Information about spouse?s job plans

        These questions could be found discriminatory against women or married people. If relevant to candidates? willingness to do the job (working overtime, traveling, etc.), they can be asked
        providing questions are framed in job-related terms, not personal terms. (Ask, ?Are you able to work overtime or weekends on very short notice if needed?? Don?t ask, ?How will you handle child care problems if we need you to work overtime??)

        14. If applicant has ever been arrested

        15. Type of discharge from military service

        16. Names of clubs, societies or lodges to which applicant belongs

        17. If applicant owns a car

        18. Whether applicant lives in a house or rents an apartment

        19. Whether applicant owns or rents a home

        These questions can be viewed as discriminatory toward a protected class of employees. For instance, certain minorities may be as a group more likely to have been arrested than whites, or less likely to own a car or a home. Hiring decisions based on such questions have to be justifiable as directly pertaining to candidates? ability to perform the job.

        20. Height and weight

        21. If applicant has a disability

        22. If applicant has AIDS or other serious diseases

        Medical questions are allowable only after an offer has been tendered. Many employers require that a job offer be contingent on the new employee passing a physical. And even the physical
        has to have some bearing on ability to do the job. Never ask medical questions during the selection process.

        20. Applicant?s age

        You can only ask age if you need to verify candidates meet minimum age requirements to hold a full-time position or work a certain number of hours (i.e., over eighteen).


        These are not just good (or bad) ideas. DuggerSD.

        They’re the law.

        1. Bill Fleming

          And yes, if they’re going to be on your direct payroll, you need their SS#. Most people have it memorized. If the worker is a subcontractor, you’ll need to have either a tax ID number or a SS# eventually in order to do your company’s taxes properly.

          1. yoyoyoyoyo

            Better take questions about being arrested of my application…good info.

            I still not sure if you can ask DOB but belive you can ask if someone is 18+ or 21+ should job duties require it.

        2. duggersd

          I believe I used my SS card and a drivers license.
          These are also the law:
          Concerning aliens being legally able to work:
          All refugees have employment authorization based on their status as refugees.

          All individuals granted asylum are authorized to work based on that status. An asylee does not need to show an employment authorization document as proof of employment authorization when applying for a Social Security number and card. However, some asylees may have those documents and provide them as evidence supporting their application.

          The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) now considers aliens granted asylum to have permanent employment authorization and requests that we treat them as permanent resident aliens. This means that when an individual granted asylum submits appropriate documentation with an SS-5, we will issue an unrestricted Social Security card.

          Like refugees, asylees are eligible for assistance and services from the Office of Refugee Resettlement for a limited period of time starting with the date asylum is granted. Because asylees need to be enrolled in certain programs within 31 days of the date they are granted asylum, it is important that the Social Security Administration assign them numbers and issue their cards quickly.

          The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), a separate office from DHS, also processes requests for asylum and may grant asylum.

          NOTE: This does not apply to an individual who has applied for asylum or who has been recommended for asylum.
          When an asylee applies for an original or replacement Social Security card, Social Security will accept as proof of alien status any of the following:

          An I-94 with a stamp showing the individual is granted asylum under section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). NOTE: Some I-94s issued to asylees are stamped or annotated “EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED,” and some are not. An individual who has been granted asylum does not need an annotation on the I-94 or an employment authorization document to be issued an Social Security number and card for work purposes.

          An employment authorization document (either Form I-688B showing “274A.12(a)(5)” on the face of the card under Provision of Law or Form I-766 showing “A5” on the face of the card under Category); or

          An order of an Immigration Judge granting asylum under the INA. The document must be the original decision (not a copy) printed on paper stock bearing the letterhead “United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Immigration Court” and show the city where the immigration court is located.

          NOTE: If you’re a noncitizen, we must verify your documents with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) before we issue a Social Security number or replacement card. Most of the time, we can quickly verify your documents online with DHS. If DHS can’t verify your documents online, it may take several weeks or months to respond to Social Security’s request. For more details, please see the answer to the Frequently Asked Question, How is SSA protecting Social Security numbers?
          This from http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-9.pdf on what must be presented:
          This from the human resources people at Princeton:
          On the first day of work, the employee will need:

          One document from Group A OR One document from Group B and one document from Group C.

          Group A
          Only One Document Needed – Establishes both Identity and Employment Eligibility

          U.S. Passport (Unexpired or expired)
          Unexpired foreign passport, with I-551 stamp or attached INS Form I-94 indicating unexpired employment authorization
          Permanent Resident Card or Alien Registration Receipt Card with photograph (INS Form I-551)
          Unexpired Temporary Resident Card (INS Form I-688)
          Unexpired Employment Authorization Card (INS Form I-688A)
          Unexpired Employment Authorization document issued by INS which contains a photograph (INS Form I-688B or Form I-766)

          Group B
          Two Documents Needed (one from Group B and one from Group C) – Group B establishes identity only

          Driver?s license or ID card issued by a state or outlying possession of the United States provided it contains a photograph or information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color and address.
          ID card issued by federal, state or local government agencies, provided it contains a photograph or information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color and address.
          Voter?s registration card
          U.S. Military card or draft record
          Military dependent?s ID card
          U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Mariner Card
          Native American tribal documents
          Driver?s license issued by a Canadian government authority

          For persons under the age 18 who are unable to present a document listed above:

          School record or report card
          Clinic, doctor, or hospital record
          Day care or nursery school record

          Group C
          Two Documents Needed (one from Group B and one from Group C) – Group C establishes employment eligibility only:

          U.S. Social Security card, issued by the Social Security Administration (other than a card stating it is not valid for employment)
          Certificate of Birth Abroad issued by the Department of State (Form FS-545 or Form DS-1350)
          Original copy or certified copy of a birth certificate issued by a state, county, municipal authority or outlying possession of the United States bearing an official seal
          Native American tribal document
          U.S. Citizen ID Card (INS Form I-197)
          ID Card for use of Resident Citizen in the United States (INS Form I-179)
          Unexpired employment authorization document issued by the INS (other than those listed under Group A)
          So, what laws are you breaking by not providing the information required? None of these are asking any of the “illegal” questions. These are the documents and forms an employee must provide and the EMPLOYER is responsible to verify and send in.

        3. duggersd

          My previous comment is being moderated. Perhaps too long. Here is the gist:
          I believe I used my SS card and a drivers license.
          These are also part of the law:
          Concerning aliens being legally able to work:
          All refugees have employment authorization based on their status as refugees.
          For more details, http://www.ssa.gov/immigration/documents.htm
          This is the form that must be filled out:
          It is up to the employer to send it in.
          These are the documents that can be used:
          Some of the documents include a SS card, a drivers license and some other forms of ID that may be used.
          Now, if you have hired someone recently, are you not complying with the law?

  10. anon

    I’m pretty sure if we started seriously fining businesses that hired illegals it would stop a lot of the problems.

    1. duggersd

      No argument there. People here illegally still need to be punished, but if we dry up the sources of income, I believe they will for the most part self-deport.

  11. Doug Wiken

    The US has spent billions to keep Russians and Chinese from invading the US, but has failed miserably to control borders and illegal aliens. This is perhaps one of the greatest unfunded “mandates” on local and state governments. State and local taxpayers, hospital patients who actually pay their bills or have insurance that does, should all be outraged.

    1. duggersd

      And isn’t it a shame when the federal government sues a state for enforcing a law that if the federal government did its job the state would not need?

      1. Bill Fleming

        In what ways do you feel the Federal Government is not doing its job of enforcing naturalization law in South Dakota, DuggerSD?

          1. Bill Fleming

            Then what is it you’re talking about?

            I thought you were referencing US Congressional authority as per Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution: “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”


  12. Troy Jones


    These two bills aren’t even close to each other. To infer they are analogous, would that be “malfeasance, corruption, or willful dishonesty?” 🙂

    HB1198 specifically and intentionally had no employer saction and the Arizona law specifically focuses on employers.


    1) Required Federal Immigration law to be the preeminent priority of local law enforcement. Not murder, not rape, not theft, but federal immigration law.

    2) Local law enforcement must, if they suspect a person might be illegal, determine their immigration status even if their priority was investigation of another crime like murder. They had no flexibility to look the other way and not investigate the immigration status even if they deemed their other investigation was more serious.

    3) Law enforcement would be unable to cut a deal for information on something more serious that could include release early from jail but we had to turn the person over to ICE. “Sorry, mom, we might have been able to find out who killed your son but we have to deport this person immediately. Its the law.”

    4) If a local sheriff were to have any policy that is deemed by a citizen of not fully enforcing all federal immigration law (i.e. having investigation of murder a higher priority) they could be sued personally in civil court.

    5) A citizen who knows a person (even a child) is illegal and transports them to recieve medical care or any other act of charity (including giving a family shelter) is subject to criminal prosecution. In fact, when you read the requirement that federal immigration law must be strictly enforced, how can local law enforcement think they have flexibility on this? Talk about criminalizing Christian acts of charity.

    Where as the legislation Rep. Nelson is now providing, all the burden and penalty is placed on employers. While I agree this is a good place to start, I will watch to make sure the requirements and penalties are proportionate. When I read what Stace referenced with regard to Arizona, I have two initial reactions: The penalty appears to be harsh for incidental violations and there seems to be no protection for a business owner being flooded with civil complaints (potentially by people with motives other than enforcing immigration law such as one otherwise opposed to the purpose of the business or entity. What would stop Planned Parenthood from filing a complaint against the Alpha Center for having part-time employees who are Mexican, Sudanese or Burmese?).

    On a side note, my family is personally committed to a local day shelter which also provides day labor assistance. I’ll be interested to know how any legislation might impact both this facility and those who employ their guests. As this is church based, they take very serious their mandate by Christ to care for all entrusted to them. In my mind, God’s commandments take precedence over any of man’s.

    Don’t get me wrong. I think reasonable sanctions against employers (and reasonable can be affected by the size of the business) is where to start. I think we also need to look at ways in which employers might be exploiting legals who have relationships with illegals. Just want to make sure they are proper and proportionate.

    1. Bill Fleming

      To be sure, Troy.

      All good points.

      It’s important to remember that only certain sections of the Arizona Law have been upheld in the courts, and even those by a very narrow margin.

      My questions ?similar to your are, “Is this really a high priority issue in the SD legislature? Is there a big problem with illegal immigration in Mr. Nelson’s district? …in South Dakota at large? We have millions of people coming into our state as tourists every year, many of them from other countries. How prudent is it of us to become highly, nationally visible in our seeming desire not to really want them to be here?”

      I also think it ironic that we don’t seem to have any problem whatsoever exporting what could be American jobs to other countries in order to save on labor costs and thus maximize profits, but when a company tries to do the same thing on our own soil and at least derive some economic benefit from it via Fed and State tax revenue, guys like MC are ready to call it “treason.”

      Sorry, I just don’t get it.

    2. Stace Nelson

      My apologies for my delinquent response. I was away from home ensuring my unwavering principles were shooting as many holes in any political prospects as possible.

      In clear succinct American English, the above post CLEARLY dealt with the bill I am working on, not the one that you appear to be fixated on that died 5 months ago: http://dakotawarcollege.com/archives/21153/comment-page-1#comment-123866

      Have you never heard the military expression about why you should never AssUme? While I respect your rights to make the first parts, the liberties you are taking that include me in the second part, clearly are not appropriate. 😀

  13. parttimeaz

    Hell is going to freeze over before we (employers) pay a good wage. Our pocket is more important than a fair wage for what we are expected to do. Most of us will not do the cheap tasks as we hire it done because we do not want to even try it.

    We will not find any local, native people that will work. Back in the late 70’s or early 80’s a meat packing plant in good old Wagner SD hired native american, local people, and anyone that would come to work. Native quit as it was overly hard. Locals quit as they felt they were under payed. The plant closed. The tribe was upset as no one supported the effort to make life better for tribe members. European heritage people will not work for the wages the owner thinks is fair. If Mexican people are willing who cares as at least the plant pays taxes of some sort… and we can go to a store and buy food that is cheap compared to most of the world…… Your choice folks…

    Those that want to get rid of the Mexican willing workers live in another world.

  14. grudznick

    Just fine the bejebas out of these slackard entities that hire illegal aliens. Fine them into the ground, and use that to fix the budget.

  15. J Rae

    Without weighing in on the pros or cons of the Arizona law, what has been the cost to the state (both direct and indirect.)

    I’m also thinking that our tourism industry relies on temporary visas, how would those businesses be affected? Would they be required to have a greater level of paperwork showing that those foreign workers actually returned to their home countries?

    Guess I’m thinking that with the pain that Georgia and Arizona have had with their new laws, that the cure is probably more expensive than the problem.

    1. duggersd

      Actually employers are already required to send in paperwork. The employee must show they are eligible to work in the US and the employer must send it in. In cases where things do not match up, the employer must inform the employee and the employee must resolve the issue.

  16. Duh

    Here we go again. Illegal is Illegal.

    I’ve seen the increasing illegal problem in Huron. It should be called El Huron. However, capitalism has a way of righting itself. If you take out the illegal employee factor, employers soon come to the realization that in order to survive, they need to attract workers. If that means better pay, then so be it. The ENTIRE reason for the low pay is that the employers know their workers are illegal and that the illegal worker won’t complain about their wages under the fear of deportation. It’s essentially reverse extortion…. the employer pays crappy wages, the employee has no alternative but to take the crappy wages. The employer’s greed will destroy the community it resides in. Plain and simple. Lee may be right that illegals will only do those jobs where its dirty and doesn’t pay. However, if you change the parameters and pay more, that situation would change.

  17. anonymous

    Dennis Daugaard is a man I admire. He worked a lot jobs people wouldn’t and look at where he ended up. Governor of South Dakota. Maybe we should all stop thinking we are better than a particular job and our society would be a lot better off.

    Some people like being farm hands. That’s up to them and good for them for enjoying what they do.

    I think the jobs and work Dennis has done has made him a better man.

    1. anonymous

      I think it would be good for a lot of kids in this country to spend a week working on a farm or washing dishes.

      This is one of the problems with our society. We think we are too good to start at the bottom. I guarantee you Governor Daugaard would not be Governor if he’d have skipped the hard work to get himself through law school or complained about helping his parents with chores.

      He did what had to be done at his farm and then he did what he needed to do to pay for law school.

  18. CaveMan

    DUH 11:01; You freaken nailed it!!

    What if cops all said “Ah the guys just have a couple ounces of pot in their trunk, let em go!”

    Or “The guy is just a bit over the limit, give him a ride home.”

    Or” He just sucker punched his wife and didn’t want to really hurt her, lets get out of here and let this family alone.”

  19. springer

    Let’s see now, Obama himself declared that he will not enforce anti-immigration laws. If the head honcho of the US can decide which laws he will and will not obey, I guess we can all do the same.

    This is exactly why anti-immigration laws should be enforced. Forget all the namby-pamby about they do work no one else will do, the social costs of illegal immigration, whether it is fair to deport them or whatever, it simply boils down to the fact that we either obey laws or we don’t. And it is very dangerous to the fabric of our society if the President himself ignores the law or says we don’t have to obey a certain law, as in this case.


Leave a Reply to Spartan76 Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.