Reason Roundup

Mississippi ICE Raids Highlight Glaring Weakness With E-Verify, Immigration Restrictionists' Favorite Big Government Program

Plus: Federal government looks to expand marijuana research, America's housing boom is not helping more people afford new homes, and more...

|

Last week's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids at food processing plants in Mississippi highlight a major failing of the federal government's database program that's meant to stop illegal immigrants from being hired.

That program, known as E-Verify, requires that employers run prospective employees' personal information through databases maintained by the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security prior to hiring. In theory, a worker is allowed to take a job only after the database check verified his or her immigration status. The Center for Immigration Studies, a group that favors limiting immigration, has called the E-Verify system a "useful, massive data-base…to keep illegal aliens from being hired" and has criticized President Donald Trump for not doing more to expand the program's use.

Mississippi was one of the first states to adopt the E-Verify program in 2011, and all employers in Mississippi are required to use it. But if E-Verify lived up to the hype, it should have made last week's ICE raids in Mississippi an exercise in futility—rather than one of the largest immigration enforcement actions in recent history.

That's pretty good evidence that E-Verify doesn't work, writes Alex Nowrasteh, the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute. Part of the problem is that illegal immigrant workers can pass off someone else's documentation as their own, and there's no way for the program to detect or prevent that low-level (and often voluntary) identify theft. Another problem is that employers are often in on the scam. Mississippi's E-Verify compliance rates are among the lowest in the country.

That seems to be what happened at the Koch Foods plants in Mississippi. In a statement, the company said it uses the E-Verify system to check employees' immigration status, but warrants obtained before the raids allege that the company "willfully and unlawfully" employed people who lacked the authorization to work in the United States.

"The cynical public choice-influenced economist in me thinks that E-Verify is popular among immigration restrictionist politicians because it doesn't work but it makes the politician look like a tough enforcer," Nowrasteh writes. "Thus, many will get the political benefits of being an immigration restrictionist without forcing their districts to pay a heavy economic cost."

But like any good, obvious government failure, last week's raids will likely produce calls for the E-Verify program to be used more, rather than scrapped. That has implications even for people who aren't illegal immigrants. Anti-immigrant politics and the government programs born of them are inevitably turned against law-abiding American citizens too—as border "checkpoints" that are nowhere near the border and the years-long detentions of American citizens by immigration cops attest.


FREE MINDS

Smoke pot for research. The National Institute on Drug Abuse has announced plans to expand its marijuana research objectives beyond the health effects of smoking pot. In a notice published Wednesday, the federal agency says it is seeking funding for research into topics like the "initiation and continued use of marijuana for therapeutic purposes" and "how cannabis industry practices, including research on marketing, taxes, and prices, impact use and health outcomes."

Marijuana Moment, a publication that tracks weed-related news, says the announcement is "one of the latest signs that the federal government is recognizing the reality of the marijuana legalization movement's continued success."

Expanding research into marijuana's uses is good. Even better would be for the Drug Enforcement Administration to stop blocking efforts to grow pot for research purposes.


FREE MARKETS

America is in the middle of another housing boom, but the supply of housing has actually become less elastic in recent years, notes Alex Tabarrok at Marginal Revolution.

What's that mean? Since the housing market bottomed out in 2012, house prices "have risen a little bit faster in this boom than in the 1996-2006 boom and they have risen much faster relative to income," Tabarrok writes. But the number of new houses being built has not risen as rapidly—which means it's not getting easier for people to afford new homes, even in the midst of a supposed "boom."

"Housing supply remains especially constrained in the coastal cities by regulation and limited land capacity and those constraints are becoming more binding over time," he concludes.


QUICK HITS

NEXT: Brickbat: Your Money Is No Good Here

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Greenland: Trump warned that island cannot be bought from Denmark

    What a same. We could have renamed it Iceland and really pissed off the Danish.

    1. Hello.

      When will Reason publish an article offering solutions on how to deal with illegal immigration? I know they pretend it’s not real (to some extent) and just talk about the positives of unfettered open borders but they seem to continue to conflated anti-illegal immigration with anti-immigration.

      Pas la meme chose.

      1. Reason magazine
        Progress uber alles

      2. Illegal immigration needs no solution to most reason staff.

        Drugs, Buttsex, ‘Mesicans…Orange Man bad.

      3. I think you have one.

        Greenland is underpopulated and getting greener.

        So we ship them there.

  2. The subheading on that Greenland story:

    “In conversations with aides, the president has—with varying degrees of seriousness—floated the idea of the U.S. buying the autonomous Danish territory”

    The story becomes even more speculative as you read it. Taking that story more seriously than it takes itself could easily make people look foolish.

    1. Even if he was just asking about it out of sheer fancy, it’s not like this is the first time we’ve looked into getting a massive tract of land that was essentially a frozen wasteland. Hell, we’ve already tried to buy Greenland a couple times in the past.

      1. Greenland is a vital territory.
        It’s a choke point protecting North America from attack via Iceland.
        Greenland, Central America, and Alaska are the keys to holding North America (and eventually, the world).
        And that’s like 5 armies a turn, which is big

        1. Iceland is not ready to roll 3 dice against Greenland.

          1. Once you get North America, then you take Iceland and Europe can’t be held

          2. Or Cleveland. Once you got that Canada is just right there.

        2. Kramer: Ha ha, the Ukraine. Do you know what the Ukraine is? It’s a sitting duck. A road apple, Newman. The Ukraine is weak. It’s feeble. I think it’s time to put the hurt on the Ukraine.

          Ukrainian: I come from Ukraine. You not say Ukraine weak.

          Kramer: Yeah, well we’re playing a game here, pal.

          Ukrainian: Ukraine is game to you?! How ’bout I take your little board and smash it!!

          1. Ironic to risk playing Risk on a risky subway train.

          2. Around here, all you need to say is “Ukraine is game to you?!” and people (the people who count) get it.

            1. Well, it is a game of world domination

              1. One which Billy Mumphry, cockeyed optimist that he is, probably isn’t too good at

                1. Now that’s funny. Because it’s real.

          3. In Ukraine, little board smash YOU.

  3. Last week’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids at food processing plants in Mississippi highlight a major failing of the federal government’s database program that’s meant to stop illegal immigrants from being hired.

    As many as 100 chicken plant workers reportedly fired after Mississippi ICE raid

    Company cannot help if illegal use bogus social security numbers. They are only required to undergo a basic Due Diligence.

    1. 100 chicken plant workers

      Nice band name; but perhaps too similar to 10,000 Maniacs.

      1. It’s literally orders of magnitude different.

    2. Yeah right- all on the workers and not their managers/owners?

      What a bootlicker.

      1. It’s how they train them in the socialist organization known as the US military.

        1. How is voluntarily agreeing to serve in the US Military under contract or Commission like Socialism?

    3. Personally, I’d hold the business owners liable. Meaning, I’d send them straight to jail, no bail until trial. For a publicly traded company, I’d make the Board of Directors liable, along with the CEO, CFO and CIO. Until business owners ‘feel the burn’, the behavior will not change.

      When business owners hire illegal aliens, they perpetuate the modern day version of slavery. This is completely wrong.

      This also assumes we detain and immediately deport illegal aliens found on worksites. They do not belong here.

      1. Voluntarily working for pay is slavery? But forcing businesses at their expense to do the government’s job isn’t? Well played, sir.

      2. When business owners hire illegal aliens, they perpetuate the modern day version of slavery. This is completely wrong.

        That word, I don’t think it means what you think it means.

        1. Oh, I beg to differ. Do you really think the owqners of these businesses are paying minimum wage? Um….yeah, sure they are.

          These business owners are exploiting these illegal aliens because they can. From a moral standpoint, that is simply wrong.

          The people responsible for it should go to prison. Then the behavior will stop.

          1. I’m pretty sure, if the workers did not feel the wages they were being paid was fair, they would not be working there. It’s not like they were imprisoned there, or being held withing the building by chains and locks like slaves.

            Taken advantage of? Maybe. Exploited? Well, people say that of every wage employee, these days. But slavery? That is specifically NOT what is happening here.

      3. Business owners are not immigration cops but you accept the proposition that the federal government can simply conscript them into the service of the state. Your position is incompatible with any version of libertarianism or classical liberalism. Somebody needs labor. Somebody shows up and accepts the work at the wage offered. This is the quintessential free market at work. If government wants to exclude one party from the transaction they will have to raise the taxes necessary to police the borders presumably with the consent of the governed. In short, fuck off slaver.

      4. “When business owners hire illegal aliens, they perpetuate the modern day version of slavery. This is completely wrong.”

        Gotta be sarc; nobody’s THAT stupid.

    4. On a scale this large, it is definitely the company at fault. I’ve had to use e-verify as a hiring manager, it is more than just ‘bogus security numbers.’ The hiree needs to present official government documentation that verifies both their name+image AND name+proof of legal status (look up ‘I-9 documentation’). A social security card would only be one of those documents.

      Next, the person doing the verification uses the e-verify system to confirm that the person and the info they present matches info on file with the SSA and DHS. It’s actually kind of creepy. When I did it, I entered the info my employee provided and it returned a picture of him along with details that could be verified off his documentation (like birth date) and I had to confirm that the documentation he gave me and the person standing in front of me matched what was on the screen.

      For a company to have that many illegal immigrants as employees is a sign of deliberate fraud on the part of management.

      1. See my comment above and fuck off slaver.

      2. Companies should be required to send in scans of the documentation, including photograph of the employee.

        1. You bet! Every company should become an investigative arm of the federal government!

  4. That program, known as E-Verify, requires that employers run prospective employees’ personal information through databases maintained by the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security prior to hiring.

    But then it takes a real human being to realize the Ecuadorian dude standing in front of you asking for a job likely isn’t named Pete Peterson.

    1. Yes, that’s the problem. E-Verify merely confirms that the SS number is valid. It can’t tell you whether the person in front of you is the one to whom the number is assigned.

    2. But its racist to accuse the non-American of being a non-American, so companies took the risk of having workers with bogus documents.

      Then Jan 20, 2017 happened.

  5. Autopsy finds broken bones in Epstein’s neck, deepening questions around his death

    Epstein slams neck into concrete or steel bunk and asphixiates himself. Or not.

    1. Slightly less obvious than shooting himself in the back.

      1. I am open to the murder claim but there needs to be some evidence.

        Prison guards pop doors for other inmates to murder some target inmate.

        There are examples of people throughout history killing themselves in almost every possible way.

        1. I think, the bulk of the problem is not the murder claim itself, but for most people, the problem is failure of trust in the government. Don’t really need evidence to support that, the lack of evidence, the combination of really weird things that stink so highly is pretty much enough. If you start from “trust is earned, not given”, then the lack of anything like realism around this case knocks the crap out of the public trust.

          There are a bunch of conspiracy theories out there, from the faked moon landing to the JFK shooting. Most of the time, considering the claims, human nature, what we know about the world is enough to put them to rest. In this case, not so much: it’s not like any of the actors involved comes from a place of great any trust.

          1. “There are a bunch of conspiracy theories out there, from the faked moon landing to the JFK shooting. Most of the time, considering the claims, human nature, what we know about the world is enough to put them to rest.”
            Yeah the evidence supporting the government story in the JFK assassination included a pristine bullet found on a stretcher in a Texas hospital along with 100 more implausible pieces of evidence. Nobody outside the media believed this crap. The conspiracy theory was that government actors conspired to create a false conventional wisdom. At this point I have no doubt that they did. I don’t know exactly what happened but human nature, and what I know about the world has not put that theory to rest.
            This case is in no way unique. The government lies every day. From the local cop perjuring himself in speeding ticket trial to Bill Barr claiming this was a simple case of bureaucratic indifference. It’s what they do. It’s how the system survives. I just watched Greg Gutfeld regurgitate Bill Barr’s talking points that Reason has been regurgitating for the last 2 days. Simple suicide. Government incompetence. Move along. Nothing to see here. Nobody in government or the media interested in remaining employed will dare question the official story. Shit, Reason has a writer who wrote a fucking book about crazy conspiracy theories with the obvious implication that if you don’t buy the government’s story you’re obviously a whack job. Whatever your lying eyes think they see believe me, this story is a done deal. The investigation is already over and 2 or 3 weeks from now nobody will give a shit. Except for a few conspiracy theorists.

          2. The problem is that the highest profile prisoner in the US with information on crimes of the ruling class manages to get dead while in government custody.

            Whether a suicide or a murder doesn’t matter much to me. It’s a red herring. With all the resources of the government, they “couldn’t” keep a guy in their custody from getting dead.

            Or keep the security cameras running.
            Or keep the guards awake.

            Much like in the case of “no crimes to see here” of Lois Lerner and Hillary, they’re just pissing down our backs and asking us how we like the rain.

  6. “To those places where Donald Trump has been terrorizing and terrifying and demeaning our fellow Americans, that’s where you will find me and this campaign,” O’Rourke said

    “Donald Trump: Domestic Terrorist”

    1. Keep fighting Beto! You’ll reach 3% in the polls any month now.

      1. He’s trying the Jonah Ryan route.
        But Beto is certainly no Jonah

    2. “Wherever evil raises it’s ugly head… I’ll be there!”

      -Batman O’Rourke

    1. It is amazing how often boehm is wrong about anything economics related.

      1. Maybe that is why he’s doing reason Roundup now.

        Eric Boehm is better at being wrong than ENB.

        1. “Yo Liz, hold my beer.”

          1. +100

            Eric Boehm seems like double beer doofus to me.

  7. Part of the problem is that illegal immigrant workers can pass off someone else’s documentation as their own, and there’s no way for the program to detect or prevent that low-level (and often voluntary) identify theft. Another problem is that employers are often in on the scam. Mississippi’s E-Verify compliance rates are among the lowest in the country.

    Guys–an employer deliberately avoiding compliance with E-verify is not evidence that E-verify doesn’t work. It’s actually a pretty good indicator that it does, since both the employee and employer try to find ways to get around it through identity theft or outright falsification of records by the employer themselves.

    1. It works as much as making drugs illegal has solved the problems of addiction in this country.

      1. Yeah, if we had no laws, there would be no problems!

        1. It’s better to focus our efforts on crimes with victims.

          1. That requires laws and a government to define what crimes with victims are.

          2. And if you really think that identify theft is a victimless crime, you’re dumber than I thought.

            1. That’s a GREAT point. Identity theft is a crime with victims.

              Of course you fail to realize that it’s a side effect of the war on voluntary labor. If we didn’t require a government issued number to work (a victimless crime) we would have less identity theft (an actual crime).

              1. If we didn’t require a government issued number to work (a victimless crime) we would have less identity theft (an actual crime).

                If we didn’t require a government issued number to work, illegal immigrants would be an even bigger drain on local resources than they already are.

                1. We could just tattoo your SSN on your arm at birth. That way we can tell the REAL ‘Mericans. Don’t hire the ones with new ink.

                  1. Yeah, because having an SSN is just like the Holocaust.

                    1. Who said it was?

                      I’m just trying to offer solutions here. They don’t have to be final.

                    2. Look at Leo reference Holocaust tattoos and then dodge and weave when confronted.

                    3. @LC1789

                      This is probably the first time that anyone has used tongue-in-cheek sarcasm on this forum.

                    4. Leo, that is why we have “/s”. Some people are not good at written sarcasm.

                  2. Are you still pretending there are no negative externalities with illegal immigration?

                    1. Nope. Like all freedoms, there are negative externalities.

      2. Is that why we have the Controlled Substances Act?

        I thought it was because drug manufacturers didnt want people self-medicating.

    2. Voluntary identity theft???

      Fuck off, Reason

      1. What’s so hard to believe about that? You can’t imagine that someone might rent out their SSN to an illegal immigrant?

        1. Not sure why people even have Social Security numbers.

          A tax ID works just fine.

          1. I’m with you there.
            Although I’d prefer we got rid of income taxes and got the government out of employment relationships altogether.

            1. Now we’re talking

        2. Would it be theft in that case? Maybe call it identity lending.

  8. When I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, one of my reasons was her history of foreign policy wisdom as both US Senator and Secretary of State. Predictably, Orange Hitler has been a disaster in this area. The New York Times explains:

    Waning of American Power? Trump Struggles With an Asia in Crisis

    “The inability or unwillingness of Washington to help defuse the flash points is one of the clearest signs yet of the erosion of American power and global influence under Mr. Trump, who has stuck to his ‘America First’ idea of disengagement, analysts say.”

    Erosion. Of. American. Power. And. Global. Influence.

    As a patriotic pro-America left-libertarian, I want to increase the US’s global influence. This is another reason I miss the days when the Republican Party was controlled by people like John McCain.

    #LibertariansForABetterGOP
    #PutTheNeoconsBackInCharge

    1. Ha. Hilary and wisdom in the same sentence. Nice job, OBL.

      1. She was literally the most qualified Presidential candidate ever.

        #StillWithHer

  9. Crying on the job? You’re not alone, with 8 in 10 workers shedding tears

    haha. So, yeah Women and Men are obviously the same in the workplace and deserve the same pay.

    Women deserve to get paid for crying at work and not working.

    1. 40% of workers cried because they were sad. Another 40% cried because they were laughing so hard at the criers.

      The 20% were in the restroom on their phones and couldn’t be reached for comment.

      1. What about those smoking and crying because they had to smoke in Siberia?

        1. Nice.

          Fn hypochondriac neoPuritans

    2. 14% of workers say they cry at least once a week

      OK…..Let’s break that out by type of job.

      1. Sexist!

      2. 99% of those 14% were journalists reading Trump’s tweets or the comments on articles

        1. #CryMore

    3. The hard-hitting article contains this insight: “Crying at work can be a sign that something is wrong.”

      Wow.

      “This just in: Experts say that decapitation can be a sign that someone has been severely injured!”

      1. Even better that the statement continues on to say “maybe you should look for another place to work.”

        1. Maybe you should’ve never gotten the job in the first place because you’re too emotionally weak to function professionally

          1. geez you guys, the onions for your burgers and onion rings aren’t going to chop themselves

    4. I have never cried at work. The few times I’ve felt that emotional (because my job was in danger of being eliminated due to org changes), I held it in and got on with things.

      The only person who I know for a fact cried at work was an assistant who was constantly berated by their boss. The boss is now a U.S. Senator. Make of that what you will.

  10. Meet the neglected 43-year-old stepchild of the US military industrial complex

    To be fair, if the Coast Guard didnt put all its eggs in the War on Drugs basket, maybe they might have money for more ice breakers.

  11. re: e-verify

    1. A law exists
    2. Some employers break the law and are caught.

    Reason’s conclusion: the law is a failure.

    1. The law is ineffective. Would you agree with that take on it?

      1. Yeah, asking a business to be an investigative arm of the gov’t (without pay) means it’s not likely to be done well.

        1. This. Conscripting private businesses to enforce immigration law doesn’t seem very libertarian.

          1. What about companies that voluntarily agree to do E-verify?

            Very Libertarian indeed.

            1. I’m fine with that.

            2. Maybe can I opt not to have my SS# in a publicly accessible database? Already had my info stolen when Dept of Personal Management (or whatever they are) got hacked because I was on my dad’s insurance long ago.

      2. Except for all the companies that don’t have problems with E-verify.

      3. The law is ineffective. Because it has no teeth against employers. The solution is to add some teeth.

        1. Now you’re talking. Lock them up. All of them!

          1. Still the dishonest dipshit huh? Will you ever admit that the importation of unskilled labor at rates greater than the job rate can cause negative externalities? Or are you stuck on borders don’t exist and only provide positives?

            1. Will you ever admit that the importation of unskilled labor at rates greater than the job rate can cause negative externalities? Or are you stuck on borders don’t exist and only provide positives?

              There are other possibilities. Almost no one thinks that there are no downsides for anyone when it comes to immigration. Of course lots of unskilled labor changes the labor market. And lots of new immigrants changes culture. The question is whether and how much the rights of Americans and foreigners in the country should have their rights curtailed in order to enforce immigration laws. Immigration laws have negative externalities too. Like pretty much everything it’s always a tradeoff.
              At least try to understand the people you disagree with as more than a black and white caricature.

            2. Will you ever admit that the importation of unskilled labor at rates greater than the job rate can cause negative externalities?

              I did above. All freedoms can create negative externalities. Doesn’t mean we should abandon them.

              Free speech can lead to hate, bigotry, racism. The right to bear arms can lead to psycho mass shooters. 4A, 5A, 6A rights means that sometimes criminals go unpunished.

            3. Will you ever admit that the importation of unskilled labor at rates greater than the job rate can cause negative externalities?

              No one here argues that there are NO negative externalities to open immigration. That is a strawman.

              What quite a few people DO argue, is that whatever negative externalities that do exist, don’t justify taking away fundamental liberties from people.

              Think of it in analogy to guns. Plenty of people believe that private ownership of guns creates so many negative externalities that it’s justified to severely limit the private ownership of guns. You, and I, and most everyone here, disagree with that assessment – not because there are no negative externalities to private ownership of guns (there are), but because these externalities don’t justify depriving individuals of the fundamental liberty to keep and bear arms.

              Get it now?

              1. “No one here argues that there are NO negative externalities to open immigration. That is a strawman.”

                What negative externalities to open borders has Reason copped to?
                How about “free” trade with Emperor Xi?

        2. OK, that’s a valid approach that would probably increase compliance. Still not a fan of requiring government permission to get a job.

          1. Is there a limited number of jobs in the United States, yes or no? Would importation of labor at rates greater than job creation create an issue, yes or no? Are there current welfare based programs that would be exploited by an influx of low skilled labor in excess of job creation, yes or no?

            1. Yes, I have never insisted or claimed that immigration has no negative effects on anything.

            2. “Is there a limited number of jobs in the United States, yes or no?”
              No.

              1. Jesse and others seem to have fully internalized the “decline narrative” that Nick was mentioning in a recent podcast. Things are in decline, opportunities are shrinking, the enemies at the gates are growing stronger, the outlook is poor, so we must jealously guard what little scraps that we have in order to preserve our livelihoods. It is sad really.

              2. What? That’s like saying there’s an unlimited number of grains of sand on the beach. It should be intuitively true that at any given time the number of grains of sand on the beach is a finite number and the fact that the ocean is constantly creating more grains of sand doesn’t change that. There are a limited number of jobs in the United States.

                Of course, it’s part of the American mythos that anybody with a little drive and ambition can start up their own business, become their own boss, create their own job and create jobs for their employees – it’s sort of the American Dream. So in that sense, the number of possible jobs is infinite, but that requires you to believe that human beings are assets rather than liabilities and clearly there are an awful lot and a lot of awful Luddites and Malthusians on this board who have no faith in humanity and human ingenuity. They can’t wrap their heads around the idea of creative destruction and spontaneous order and opportunity emerging from chaos. All change is bad and they don’t like it.

                And then you’ve got the majority of the comments, which is mostly just one troll operating several sock puppets that for some reason people keep responding to. I just ignore Donald and flag the abusive comments that are nothing more than calling everybody a sad pathetic loser, because he’s not adding anything to the conversation but merely inciting flame wars.

            3. Are Americans entitled to jobs ahead of foreigners? Yes or no?

              1. Americans are entitled to government that works for them, not foreigners.

                Government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
                The people referred to are Americans.

      4. If no one has the balls to enforce a law, then people will pretty much ignore it.

        1. Are those balls of lead shot? Because that’s the question you really need to ask. The “crime” must be worth enforcing with the full force of government. Otherwise you might as well not try to enforce it. That’s the point here.

        2. There are any number of books written by legal philosophers and scholars that argue that “the law” is and should be what the majority of people think just and proper and that unjust and improper laws diminish respect for the law. To the extent that laws need brutal enforcement and brutes to do the enforcing, these laws are unjust and improper, for if they were otherwise they wouldn’t need brutal enforcement. Most people over the age of about 4 have a developed sense of empathy and intuitively feel that murder and rape and theft and the like are wrong in a moral sense and not just a legal sense and wouldn’t go around doing these things even if there were no law against it. The sorts of “victimless crime” laws that require stricter enforcement require stricter enforcement precisely because many people don’t think there’s anything wrong with doing the thing that is prohibited. If you need somebody with balls to enforce a law, it’s obviously a law that people will pretty much ignore – because people don’t think that law should exist in the first place.

          1. Yeah. And I dismayed that there are supposed libertarians who apparently don’t get this. If laws are to work without becoming tyranny, then they need such that most people would obey them even without any vigorous enforcement.

  12. Beto O’Rourke on running for Senate instead of the presidency: “That would not be good enough for this country.”

    Did he fall off his skateboard and hit his head?

    1. *That* would not be good enough for this country.

      1. *** rubs knuckles on Beto’s head ***

        1. Beto needs to be followed around by Biff. For his own good.

    2. To be fair, he definitely has the proper level of arrogance for the job.

    3. Translated into English, it means, “Look, I just lost to the relatively unpopular Ted Cruz, what gives you the impression I’d have a fucking chance against Cornyn, you idiot?”

  13. Labor tensions flare at American Airlines over hundreds of canceled flights

    No week long news coverage of American Airlines workers using work slowdowns to break the airline company. Who cares that thousands of Americans paid for flights that where later canceled.

    1. Labor strikes only work when there isn’t a substantial cost to the people that are actually affected by the strike. You have to hurt the employer, not the customers, and at least make it look like you’re trying to be reasonable.

      Causing hundreds of summer flights to be delayed or canceled, when most people have probably made these plans months in advance, is a stupid move and will ultimately backfire.

      1. +10

  14. “Beto O’Rourke on running for Senate instead of the presidency: “That would not be good enough for this country.”

    That’s why Texans didn’t elect him to the Senate. He’s just that good.

    1. His statesmanship is only exceeded by his humility.

      1. And Beto just has so much to be humiliated about.

  15. the Dayton gunman had cocaine and other drugs in his system

    All gun control is unconstitutional, including background checks. Release this guy from jail.

    1. Kollie is charged with lying on a federal firearms form while buying a pistol not used in the attack.

      The background check perjury trap.

      1. Yup, that exception to the 2nd Amendment protected right to keep and bear Arms- drug user (prescription drugs are okay though).

        1. If you don’t kill someone with your “assault” pistol, then we’ll nail you on some process crimes. Get ’em up against the wall!

          1. Classic Police State tactics- if the actual criminal gets killed, we go after anyone we can to show the public we deserve all that taxpayer moola.

      2. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.

        What evidence do they offer that he was lying at the time he filled out the paperwork? I mean, you fill out some paperwork asserting that you’re a legal resident of the US and it’s a sure thing that at some point you’re going to cease being a legal resident of anywhere at all – can the government charge all dead people at the moment of their death with lying about their residency status?

    2. Dr. Kent Harshbarger said during a Thursday news conference that two people shot Aug. 4 by Betts were also shot by police but that none of the shots were lethal.

      Ha!

      1. none of the shots were lethal.

        But collectively ….

        1. “We can prove without doubt that the bullet in her leg isn’t what killed her. It was the several bullets in her back as she lay face down on the ground that were lethal.”

  16. Conservatives who pounce on David Hogg’s reported 1270 SAT score to claim he’s “not Ivy League material” are clearly mistaken. With a single tweet, Hogg perfectly summarizes the insanity of our gun laws:

    It’s harder to get cold pills than an AR-15. Something needs to change.

    We must defeat the gun fetishists. And as longtime libertarian activist Michael Hihn has repeatedly explained, a ban on deadly military style assault weapons is both Constitutional and desirable from a libertarian POV.

    #BanAssaultWeapons
    #UnbanMichaelHihn

    1. “It’s harder to get cold pills than an AR-15. Something needs to change.”

      I agree. Legalize cold pills.

    2. Did Hihn finally use up the world’s entire supply of sock names and get committed?

      1. There was some pretty good Hihn yesterday.

        1. Has “good” changed its definition?

          1. Well, not good-good. Typically deranged and angry Hihn.

            1. On that, we can agree.

    3. Which assumes the difficulties getting effective cold medicine are not stupid.

    4. Sadly this is an improvement over Obama’s claim that it’s easier for a teen to get a gun than to get a book. The guy honestly said that, on purpose, and never got much shit for it. From there we have to take small victories wherever we can.

  17. “Trump wants to make immigration white again”
    How do we know that? Well:
    “Under the new policy, federal authorities will use “aggressive” wealth tests to reject residency or citizenship for an immigrant “because he or she is likely at any time to become a public charge” — receiving food stamps or other taxpayer-funded welfare state benefits. And officials can make that determination by considering the migrant’s “age; health; family status; assets, resources, and financial status; and education and skills.”
    In practice, the new rule almost certainly means that more European migrants will go to the front of the line, and people of color will go to the back.”
    https://theweek.com/articles/858662/trump-wants-make-immigration-white-again

    The racist lefty Joel Mathis is sure only white people can make money.

    1. Never let an instance of disparate impact go to waste.

    2. Yes, because the Chinese and Indian immigrants that have taken over the neighborhoods surrounding Amazon and Microsoft aren’t young, healthy, middle class, highly educated, and with in-demand skills.

  18. E Verify doesnt work because it has no teeth when employers intentionally exploit it when arizona tried to ad laws to punish employers for misuse of the system, knowingly running wrong social security numbers, they were sued by the Obama DOJ. Give the law some teeth against employers and you’ll find the database works well.

    1. Precisely. Would’ve been nice to have seen the owners perp-walked out with the illegals.

      You could solve illegal immigration problems better if you punished employers with an iron fist. But heaven forbid we actually do something useful.

    2. The DOJ is against stronger enforcement because in practice that would mean subjecting Hispanic job applicants to a higher level of scrutiny.

      1. No it wouldn’t. The database doesnt ask for race.

        1. Which is one reason why E-Verify is ineffective. As has already been pointed out above, effective identity checking would require a human being to distinguish between Peter and Pedro.

          1. I see someone doesn’t know how the E-Verify database works. It asks for Name, Date of Birth. If you are wrong one one of the two right now, an employer can cough and have you change what was wrong on the list. Likewise the system is set up to identify when the “same” worker is working multiple jobs in different locations. That feature is not currently turned on. It is similar to the one the IRS can use to identify tax cheats.

          2. But I identify as Caucasian!

    3. It’s always been Immigration Enforcement Theater.
      Typical bureaucratic fill out the forms CYA.

      But it’s not hard to make it work.
      Require employers to scan in the documents they use, and a photo of their employee.

  19. Let Hongkongers move to…America!

    We’ll trade American Communists for Hongkongers. Hell, offer them two-for-one!

    1. Absolutely.
      You think we could pull off a chemjeff+buttplug for that lady who got shot in the face with a bean bag?

  20. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has become somewhat of a pariah, mostly for having committed a couple of heinous atrocities: 1) presumably ordering the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi and 2) enjoying the support of Donald Trump. In the eyes of the media, I’m not sure which is worse, but I’m sure the government of Saudi Arabia hasn’t received enough credit for major reforms in the kingdom over the last few years–all under the insistence of the Crown Prince. Here’s a short list:

    – Movie theaters are now permitted in the Kingdom
    – Women are now allowed to attend sporting events
    – Women are now allowed to drive
    – The religious police are no longer allowed to stop women (much less punish them) for what they’re wearing or being unaccompanied by a male relative–or for any other reason.
    – As of last week, it was announced that women will no longer be required to obtain the permission of the most important male relative to leave the country

    Pretty forward thinking stuff for Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately, for the people of Saudi Arabia, the Crown Prince may be a little too forward thinking . . .

    Another big reform is that the Crown Prince is behind the effort to take Aramco, the Saudi national oil company, public. This is forward thinking in a number of ways. For instance, subjecting Aramco’s stock price to market forces could eventually put a stake through the heart of OPEC, the essential purpose of which is to attempt to inflict the cartel’s will on the oil market. Also, the IPO will raise trillions, and that will give the Saudis the opportunity to diversify their economy away from oil–which is where the problems with “forward thinking” begin.

    “Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman would like to see Aramco valued at $2 trillion, about $500 billion more than bankers are currently estimating, according to sources.”

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/12/saudi-aramco-says-its-ready-to-go-public.html

    That $500 billion is almost certainly about investing in the city of Neom. What, you’ve never heard of the city of Neom? That’s probably because it doesn’t exist yet. It’s expected to cost about $500 billion to build, and it’s to be a futuristic city–the kind that’s built on assumptions about the future that would make Elon Musk blush. Automation, regular human interactions with robots, genetically engineered people, total surveillance replacing traditional policing, sky taxis, alternative energy–all of which is meant to foster a city that acts as new Silicon Valley/Biotech Beach and all of it built from scratch under the direction of the Crown Prince!

    Neom is doomed to fail for all the same reasons that centrally planed, futuristic cities always fail. $500 billion down the drain. Oh the humanity! Educating women and freeing them to do productive work would cost less and have more of a transformative economic impact.

    1. – Movie theaters are now permitted in the Kingdom
      – Women are now allowed to attend sporting events
      – Women are now allowed to drive
      – The religious police are no longer allowed to stop women (much less punish them) for what they’re wearing or being unaccompanied by a male relative–or for any other reason.
      – As of last week, it was announced that women will no longer be required to obtain the permission of the most important male relative to leave the country

      Funny how Trump does not get “blamed” for these Women’s rights.

    2. good post, I’ve noticed Reason hasn’t mentioned the reforms. I guess it’s not as important as their pet foreign policy issue, i.e. trying to convince us how misunderstood and victimized Iran is

      1. On second thought, I think they did mention the driving. But I don’t remember anything else. It should be seen as a bigger deal than it is.

    3. Interesting. Usually, when the owners decide to take a company public, it means they’ve extracted all the easy profit and have determined that going forward they’ll make more by selling ownership interests in the market.

      1. He wants to be like Dubai and Abu Dhabi–only more so–I’m sure.

        Part of it is that they really do need to transition away from only being an oil producing country. Tesla isn’t exactly an also-ran at this point, but a big debate among the auto manufacturers right now is whether the half of them that haven’t already dropped their hybrid lines in favor of going all-electric should do so.

        I’m not saying that people won’t use oil in the future, but peak demand, for them, may be a bigger concern than peak supply ever was, and if they were ever going to go public and sell their oil supply short, now would probably be better than later–just to hedge the risk. Oil demand doesn’t need to go all the way to zero to completely devastate the Saudi economy.

      2. Occurred to me as well.

    4. The IPO will make public about 10 percent of the company’s ownership. Even if he gets the valuation he wants it’d be a capital raise of a couple hundred billion.

    5. ” presumably ordering the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi ”

      I worry that we’re really passing the point of no return on the ruling class lying to us. And half the country believing it. When we can’t agree on reality, eventually the talking stops and the bullets start.

      The hysteria over Khashoggi getting offed was absurd. A day that the Saudis off one of their citizens is a *slow* day for Saudi executioners, and a *good* day for Saudi citizens. And the guy was a Saudi intelligence asset.

      *Every* story is absurd these days. The *more* media hysteria, the *more* absurd.

      “Separating children from their families”
      “Russian Collusion”
      “Hillary had no ‘criminal intent'” following “There’s no proof there was classified information on Hillary’s server”
      “Epstein shot himself in the back of the head. Twice.”
      “Trump called Nazis fine people”
      “Trump is a white supremacist”
      “Trump voters are white supremacists”
      “We talked about kids and yoga on the tarmac”
      “Not even a smidgen of corruption from Lois Lerner and the IRS”

    6. +1
      Yet again proving that the only journalism worth reading at Reason occurs in the comments section.

  21. Israel will allow Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D–Mich.) to visit her 90-year-old grandmother, despite Trump’s calls for the country to deny entry to Tlaib and Rep. Omar Ilhan (D–Minn.).

    Except that Tlaib has now announced she’s not going to go because the conditions Israel imposed are simply intolerable.

    She applied to go under humanitarian grounds – she wanted to see her dear old grandma because who knows how long the dear old lady might be around. Israel said she could come see her dear old grandma, as long as she agreed not to be promoting anti-Semitism while she was there. Tlaib said if she couldn’t promote anti-Semitism while she was there, then dear old grandma could suck it.

    There’s a saying that there will never be peace in the Middle East until Palestinians love their children more than they hate Jews. I think Tlaib just proved that point loud and clear.

    1. It’s not even an accurate statement on Boehm’s part. Either he never read the release from Netanyahu, or he’s deliberately lying about the circumstances.

      Netanyahu explicitly stated right up front that, while Omar and Tlaib would not be allowed to enter for the purposes of their visit, he’d allow Tlaib a humanitarian visa to go visit her relatives in the West Bank if she wanted it.

      Tlaib then flat-out lied that he was denying her entry, and of course Boehm ran with the narrative established by the Blue Checkmark Brigade (because, hey, why bother looking at primary sources these days?) that he denied her entry and then caved after getting some negative publicity.

      The willful obtuseness and blatant propagandizing of the modern journalist would be criminal if it wasn’t so sad.

      1. +10

      1. She’s obviously distraught because she has to hold the selfie stick with the hand with which she prefers to make the peace sign. The poor woman.

        1. It’s all the fault of those dastardly Jews Israelis.

    2. Did you know that she and her colleague, on their travel request, listed “Palestine“ rather than “Israel“ as their destination? I wouldn’t let them in either.

      Imagine if a member of Congress tried to enter Poland after a listing “East Prussia” as his or her intended destination.

  22. So if a regulatory system cannot largely prevent itself from being defrauded, it is useless? I suppose that makes any rule for establishing one’s identity laws against identity theft in general useless as well.

    That is really a rather weak argument against any such system.

    1. So if a regulatory system cannot largely prevent itself from being defrauded, it is useless?

      Reason survey says YES.

    2. Yeah, I oppose requiring everyone to get permission from the government before you hire someone. That’s fundamentally unlibertarian–and violates freedom of association.

      I would not oppose this system on the basis that it’s ineffective. The drug war against marijuana wasn’t completely ineffective, and the more effort they put into it, the more effective it was. The point was that legalization was a more effective means to keep the stuff out of the hands of children–and legalization comes without all sorts of other expensive and unjust consequences.

      E-verify can be more effective, and making it effective will require more enforcement–in the form of raids, I imagine. And why shouldn’t companies be free to hire whomever they want anyway, is my response.

      My response is not, “Look how ineffective this E-verify thing is because it requires enforcement”.

      1. P.S. It may be that the current crop of Reason writers doesn’t like emphasizing freedom of association because it suggests support for various kinds of discrimination in the minds of intellectual weaklings.

        1. +100

      2. Inducing invasion and occupation of the US is illegal and *should* be illegal.

        “I can hire anyone I want in Libertopia”

        Libertopia is fantasy land where libertarian law writes itself and enforces itself.

        In the real world, the libertarianish nature of the US is enforced by Americans saying “this is our dirt, and on our dirt, our rules apply”.

        Let a bunch of Not Americans in, and they start applying their rules, and your “muh liberty” doesn’t mean squat to them.

        You can hire anyone you want. But your hiring whimsy is not the most important considerations for our immigration policy – that’s securing the blessing of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. That takes things like borders, and laws, and taxes, and police, and armies, and courts, but most importantly, a populace that also wants to secure the blessings of liberty. And that’s not most of the world.

  23. I didnt like that. too bad. Why? SSO id

  24. Tlaib decided not to go.

    “When I won, it gave the Palestinian people hope that someone will finally speak the truth about the inhumane conditions. I can’t allow the State of Israel to take away that light by humiliating me & use my love for my sity to bow down to their oppressive & racist policies.

    My sity wanted to pick figs w/ me. I broke down reading this & worry every single day after I won for my family’s safety. My cousin was texting me which photo of @IlhanMN & I they should put on a welcoming poster when I heard the news. I couldn’t tell her.”

    —-@RashidaTlaib, two hours ago.

    If she can’t use her visit to grandstand against Israel, then she doesn’t want to go–so now she’ll grandstand about Israel supposedly retaliating against her family. That’s what I’m reading here.

    Whether the people of Israel should allow an antisemite to come into their country for the sole purpose of humiliating them is one question. Whether they have the right to decide if they want to subject themselves to humiliation by an antisemite is another question entirely. The answer to both questions is probably at the ballot box.

    1. Funny how Tlaib and Omar are not yelling for Israel to have open borders so they can enter illegally.

      Must be because Israelis wouldn’t tolerate that bullshit.

    2. When I won, it gave the Palestinian people hope that someone will finally speak the truth about the inhumane conditions.

      That’s a pretty blatant admission that she ran for Congress to represent foreigners, not Americans.

      Whether the people of Israel should allow an antisemite to come into their country for the sole purpose of humiliating them is one question.

      Their itinerary was pretty blatant about the fact that they were going to use the trip as a means to gain support for subverting Israel. If they really wanted to meet with Israeli leaders about Palesitinian living conditions, they could have done so last week when 70 other Democrats did just that.

      Tlaib’s whole screed here is typical Arab disingenuousness whenever anyone doesn’t suck up to them and let them do whatever they please.

  25. E-Verify: A program which conscripts private businesses to enforce a law against a victimless crime.

    Peak America, right there

    1. Victimless? Peddle that bullshit to the people whose identities have been stolen. Peddle it to the US taxpayers who have to pay for all those bennies sucked up by said criminals.

      1. Identity theft: not victimless.
        Taxation: not victimless.
        Simply coming here without the correct papers: victimless.

        Why is it that you all love to conflate the act of immigration itself, with any acts that an immigrant might conduct AFTERWARDS?

        “I walked to the park and shot a man. Therefore, walking must be regulated!” makes no sense.

    2. Invasion is not a victimless crime.

      Invasions and the repulsion of invasions often kill lots and lots of people.

  26. E-Verify: Illegals hate it, so it must be doing something to limit their illegal activities.

    #MAGA

  27. E-verify, anti-drug laws, and assault-weapon registration laws, have one thing in common. They don’t work. Seems that when the government tries to restrict things which people want, they fail. And when they try to restrict things that a LOT of people want, they fail miserably.

    1. One additional thing they have in common: when they don’t work, the government quadruples down on them.

      1. But of course. One thing the government is really good at, is abject failure.

    2. E-Verify doesn’t work because it was designed to be Immigration Enforcement Theater.

      ID Verification is not rocket science. It happens all around us every day all day. It just takes the will to do it.

  28. It’s a real bummer that Boomers are so committed to making housing unaffordable for their children and grandchildren.

    1. On the other hand, the three homes I own, two which are rentals, are worth a whole lot of money, and the housing shortage most definitely increases their value, and, obviously, the rents stay high, as well. This is all good for whoever inherits my properties. So, perhaps Boomers are “torn?”

      1. Absolutely no consideration for others. The boomer’s protection of what they have at all costs, including the cost of making rent and housing extremely unaffordable for the next generation of Americans, blows my mind.

        But by all means, you got yours, right? Once you get to the top of the ladder, you’re supposed to kick it over and spit on the younger people coming up, right?

        1. Unfortunately, when it comes down to $$$, a considerable percentage of folks respond that way. The old saying regarding elections: “It’s all about the economy, stupid,” is more accurate that not. Don’t worry, when I go my properties will be liquidated and the money donated to a no-kill animal shelter to provide free spaying, chipping, and neutering for low-income pet owners.

    2. It’s interesting how much hatred there is for Boomers.

      Looks like they’ll be pushed out onto the ice floes any day now.

  29. Its super weird to me that Reason authors are unaware that illegal aliens compete with Americans for housing and therefore raise prices. Very weird.

    1. The laws of supply and demand are repealed when it comes to illegals, because borders are bad, m’kay?

  30. Appeals court sides with Trump administration on asylum rule, limits injunction

    uh oh! Another court sides with Trump’s policy on immigration and asylum.

    A federal appeals court sided with the Trump administration on Friday in the legal battle over its efforts to limit asylum claims from Central America – blocking, for now, a nationwide injunction that blocked the implementation of the rule.

    Last month a California federal judge blocked the rule that would require migrants to first apply in one of the countries they cross on their way to the U.S.

  31. That program, known as E-Verify, requires that employers run prospective employees’ personal information through databases maintained by the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security prior to hiring.

    If these employers wanted to be immigration agents they would have taken that career path, instead of being engines that drive our economy.

    1. Same attitude toward statutory rape?

      “Hey, I never signed up to be a cop! Muh liberty!”

      1. “Same attitude toward statutory rape?”

        Yep, exactly alike!
        Fucking STUPID!

  32. …the federal agency says it is seeking funding for research into topics like the “initiation and continued use of marijuana for therapeutic purposes” and “how cannabis industry practices, including research on marketing, taxes, and prices, impact use and health outcomes.”

    THEY’RE NORMALIZING REEFER!

  33. Housing supply remains especially constrained in the coastal cities by regulation and limited land capacity and those constraints are becoming more binding over time…

    The flyover states are always open for business.

  34. Having solved all the more important issues facing America, Donald Trump sets his eyes on acquiring Greenland.

    He knows prime real estate when he sees it.

  35. Let Hongkongers move to Britain. Or America!

    They’re more patriotic than some of our NFLers!

  36. NYC medical examiner rules Jeffrey Epstein death suicide by hanging

    Official cause of death for Epstein is death by hanging.

    Contrary to what John thinks, it can be done in jail.

  37. If a company knowingly hired undocumented workers, how is it that a strike against E-verify?

    Criminals can steal guns or obtain them through straw purchase. That doesn’t necessarily mean current background checks are ineffective.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.