Comments (17)

dolgre wrote on December 20, 2006 11:52 AM:

As the American version of Bagdad Bob, it is expected that Bush would say something as stupid as this. My real anger is at the damn press core, who were so wimpy, lazy or uninformed as to let him get off without so much as a follow up question that included these statistics.

What? wrote on December 20, 2006 11:52 AM:

Although I'm aware not all of those arrested were charged with identity theft, I also know that no major company will put someone on the payroll without a social security number. Ergo, those who are here illegally were (and are) providing false information to some of their employers. Just because that act doesn't meet the legal threshold for identity theft doesn't mean they weren't using forged documents.

es wrote on December 20, 2006 12:00 PM:

Companies don't HAVE to have SS numbers. There are other types of id numbers that can be used, such as a green card number. I should also note that if an illegal is using an invalid SS number, that illegal will never receive a penny in SS benefits. Pure profit from a social security trust fund point of view. I've seen reports that if all the SS tax that illegals pay suddenly dried up, then the SS system WOULD be in serious financial trouble, rather than the 20 years down-the-road pretend trouble it is in.

Disputo wrote on December 20, 2006 12:02 PM:

"I also know that no major company will put someone on the payroll without a social security number."

Because "major" companies never break the law, huh?

Your premise is false, ergo, your conclusion is unsupported.

MS wrote on December 20, 2006 12:11 PM:

Latin American hotel cleaners in Emeryville CA are now picketing the hotel because they were given 2 weeks notice (2 weeks before Christmas), claiming that their Social Security numbers were fraudulent.

Maybe the hotel chain now has its slate 'clean' of workers without true Social Security numbers.

But dozens of women with families, who cleaned the hotel rooms, are now jobless in the holiday season.

Who does that serve?

MS wrote on December 20, 2006 12:15 PM:

UPDATE: http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/4574/1/32/

Turns out this may be retaliation for an effort to unionize the Woodfin Hotel:

Employers Illegally Target Immigrant Workers for Organizing Unions

By David Bacon, PoliticalAffairs.net

EMERYVILLE, CA - 16DECEMBER06 - Immigrant workers and their supporters protest outside the Woodfin Suites hotel in Emeryville, the morning after hotel managers fired 20 workers. They [Woodfin] accused the workers of lacking legal permission to work, alleging that Social Security said their numbers didn't match its datebase. Workers say the hotel was retaliating against them for trying to enforce the city's new living wage ordinance. The Bush administration has vowed to increase enforcement of employer sanctions, the section of immigration law which prohibits employers from hiring undocumented workers, but which, in effect, make it a crime for an undocumented worker to hold a job. Most unions call for the repeal of employer sanctions.

mary wrote on December 20, 2006 12:27 PM:

I hate to spoil the party, but what the moron in chief said isn't really the same as what you are accusing him of having said. He said they all had "forged" documents, which may in fact be true. It's not the same as saying they all had stolen identities.

Chris Baker wrote on December 20, 2006 12:32 PM:

Why do you readers of this web-site think these ex-workers face either criminal charges leading to jail time followed by deportation, or simple deportation after a hearing? If they are caught in the US after deportation they can face criminal charges.

Also this company uses the Department of Homeland Security's system to VERIFY SS numbers and ID numbers by computer. That means every worker had to have a SS number, or a federal ID number if claiming to be here legally on a work visa. "Fraudsters" isn't a great term - but "willfully using fraudulent documents" or "willfully committing identity theft" certainly is.

Nell wrote on December 20, 2006 12:54 PM:

@Chris Baker: fraudulent documents, probably. Identity theft? No way. Identity theft is a specific type of crime with no connection to immigrant workers. It involves getting access to a specific person's social security number, credit card numbers, and other information, and using them for financial gain.

The misuse of the term 'identity theft' in this repressive crackdown on workers is yet another effort to connect immigrant workers to something scary to middle-class citizens, to make them a "them" who can be abused at will, politically and in physical fact.

Tim wrote on December 20, 2006 1:23 PM:

I only regret you didn't make the headline "ICE Raids Netted Only Fraudsters, Bush Fraudulently Claims".

Wretched Refuse wrote on December 20, 2006 1:46 PM:

So let me see if I have this right:
IN a city that has bang the employer who is not paying a fair wage, the DHS a "not for hire" strong arm came into a place of business that supposedly would NEVER HIRE AN ILLEGAL, and arrested 1300 people on the grounds that they were either working illegally or in the states illegally.
So in essence, no person needed to have KNOW who's SS# they used, hence NO ID THEFT, More like putting money in some anonymous person's bank account. Is that illegal? No. Do I need to know the person's identity to do that? No.
DAMN, I hope they pumped up my SS account. Can I give my number to be used in this way so I can reach my per year cap, and stop paying my SS early in the year? I would like that.
To say:
"I also know that no major company will put someone on the payroll without a social security number. Ergo, those who are here illegally were (and are) providing false information to some of their employers."
Shows a willful ignorance of history, and just plain stupidity. Please take yourself out of any discussion with the adults.
Off yourself.

Anonymous wrote on December 20, 2006 1:48 PM:

I bet you the SS3 they used are of people in guvmint, and that is the way they used these illegals to meet their SS per year cap.

Think about it.

Jean Camp wrote on December 20, 2006 1:54 PM:

It is true that illegal emplyment requires a SSN.

However, if that SSN is not linked with the name and DoB of the actual SSN holder it generates an additional credit record and an additional tax record. For example, any one of us may have a SSN that corresponds to multiple names and thus multiple records. SSN numbers provide an index to credit records and tax records, not a unique identifier.

Because of this, people who are employed illegally can adopt a SSN, build up a credit record, buy a house (or have a lousy credit record) and there is no result for the native individual who had the SSN first.

So while it is a crime to provide a fake SSN, it is not in intself fraud. Nor will it be at all visible to the person who is sharing the SSN.

Such a sweet, stupid ass wrote on December 20, 2006 4:17 PM:

Our president is about as clueless as can be imagined without, say, the need for a walker or seeing-eye dog (or anti-psychotic meds, but hey, maybe he takes those, who knows?). What an absolute hardcore willful endlessly inventive motherflubbing stupid ass.

No, that's not how I really feel.

theAmericanist wrote on December 21, 2006 10:25 AM:

I'm seriously disappointed in TPM on this issue. You're stating things that are so wrong, you're on the edge of actively misleading your readers.

ALL new hires have to present a Social Security # for tax purposes. When ICE does a raid like this, they generally cause the company to terminate workers whose name does not match the SSN they gave, or whose SSN was never verified before and turns out to be false, or whose other documents, e.g. a resident alien card, is false or not work-authorized, and so on, or else (as has happened all over the country for years) illegal workers simply flee.

The paper work on the Swift raids isn't done yet, but a fairly good approximation of the ratio are the Georgia raid a couple weeks back: of roughly 600 employees with bad SSNs or other documents, about 75 were legit, e.g., they had gotten married and changed their names before being hired, without notifying the Social Security Administration, or they had gotten their own #s wrong.

ALL the rest have a solid prima facie case for being illegally working -- with the additional evidence that most promptly quit or otherwise bailed immediately after the raid. In that case, as in the Swift raids, the UFCW has been fishing in troubled waters, e.g., scaring legit workers who got no-match letters that this was a termination notice, which it ain't.

It IS a notice that if you're working illegally, you CANNOT KEEP THE JOB. Repeat that as necessary, cuz it seems to be a fact you guys ain't interested in.

Since the raids, Swift has RAISED the salaries being offered for these jobs.

So, let's be clear: TPM's reporting on this has 1) gotten the law wrong, 2) gotten the facts wrong, 3) tended to promote the idea that legal and illegal are the same, 4) promoted the idea that enforcing immigration law is wrong, and finally 5) defended a practice that obviously subsidized an employer hiring illegal workers.

Try to do better, willya Josh?

Jon wrote on January 31, 2007 11:34 PM:

Thanks Nick, it helps when you're a web developer by trade ;)

credit card offers wrote on April 24, 2007 8:00 AM:

Credit cards are a great financial tool, offering many benefits:

* They can be safer and more convenient to use and carry than cash
* Credit cards offer the ability to buy goods and services now and pay for them later
* They have valuable consumer protections under the law
* Major credit cards are accepted by merchants around the world
* They may provide a source of cash or payment in an emergency
* Credit cards can guarantee hotel or travel reservations
* If you are not happy with a purchase you made using a credit card, you may have the right to withhold payment until the problem is resolved.