Updated - Libertarian pushed Gold Dome 'reciprocity' bill (HB147) would dismantle screening process for illegal aliens accessing professional licenses *UPDATED WITH ADDITION OF IDENTICAL SENATE BILL (SB45) INFO

Because of a mixup here (entirely my fault), the fact that the below ‘reciprocity’ bill (HB 147) has an identical companion bill in the state senate was left out of the write-up. SB 45 has all the same problems and “free market” lobbyist drivers as HB 147. The text of SB 45 is here as are all of the sponsors. I was told there would be an amendment to require any reciprocity for professional licenses to adhere to the intent and language of existing verification law. ~~I do not see an amendment reflected in this official current version of the bill.~~

Update: 4:50 PM Feb 11. – SB 45 has been amended (lines 45 & 46. You may need to hit refresh) to require compliance with the verifciation system in OCGA 50-36-1. We are grateful to Sen. Bruce Thompson.

To save time and confusion we list the sponsors – dak:

Thompson, Bruce 14th

2. Albers, John 56th

3. Gooch, Steve 51st

4. Mullis, Jeff 53rd

5. Beach, Brandon 21st

6. Cowsert, Bill 46th

7. Payne, Chuck 54th

8. Anavitarte, Jason 31st

9. Dugan, Mike 30th

10. Harbin, Marty 16th

11. Hickman, Billy 4th

12. McNeill, Sheila

“The legislation is a rerun of a very similar bill last year from now-departed Rep Scot Turner (R- Holly Springs) that expired due to an excessive amount of scrutiny.”

Republicans calling themselves conservatives while proudly espousing “free markets” should not be allowed to ignore the fact that Georgia and the U.S. have a debilitating illegal immigration problem. One that is on its way to record and epic national proportions under the Biden Regime while it is totally ignored here by Governor “I have a Big Truck” Brian Kemp.

Under Georgia’s Gold Dome, Rep Heath Clark (R – Warner Robins) has introduced HB 147 that we are reliably informed is the work of Marc Hyden who is Director of State Government Affairs at the Libertarian Washington D.C. lobbying entity called ‘R Street” (“Free markets. Real solutions”). The bill is aimed at “reciprocity” in professional licensing. The nutshell explanation of the idea is that if an individual who holds a professional license in any other state relocates to Georgia, most of the current professional licensing process is waived.

Shorter: “Ya’ll come! If you or your employees have already been licensed by California, New York or any other state, we fast-track professional licensing and put your company to work in a flash, because “number one for business!”

Clark has lined up a list of Republican co-signers who we are guessing don’t spend a lot of time thinking about illegal immigration or the fact that illegal employment is the main driver behind Georgia being home to more “undocumented workers” than green card holders.

With the thought that more voters should read pending legislation, along with a list of co-sponsors, below is the active ingredient in Rep Heath Clark & Co.’s bill:

HB 147

LC 36 4490

Sponsor: Rep Heath Clark ( R-Warner Robbins)

Visible Co-sponsors

Rep Rick Jasperse (R- Jasper)

Rep Bruce Williamson (R-Monroe)

Rep Dale Washburn (R-Macon)

Rep Chuck Martin (R- Alpharetta)

Rep Wes Cantrell (R-Woodstock)

Beginning on line 33

“Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, a professional licensing board or other

board shall issue a license by endorsement to any individual that:

Moves from another state and establishes residency in this state;

Holds a current license to practice such occupation or profession issued by another

state that was acquired prior to moving from another state and establishing residency in

this state for which the training, experience, and testing are substantially similar in

qualifications and scope to the requirements under this state to obtain a license;

Is in good standing in such other state; and

Passes any examination that may only be required to demonstrate knowledge of the

laws and rules and regulations of this state specific to the practice of the profession,

business, or trade for which such license by endorsement is being sought…”

*Emphasis mine. dak

The legislation is a rerun of a very similar bill last year from now-departed Rep Scot Turner (R- Holly Springs) that expired due to an excessive amount of scrutiny.

Apparently either nobody involved with Clark’s dollar-first legislation has given thought to illegal immigration – or they just don’t care.

Current state law screens professional license applicants for U.S. citizenship or immigration status. If the entire law (OCGA 50-36-1) were actually enforced, it would go a long way to reducing the illegal population. Professional licenses are on the list of ‘public benefits’ in Georgia code that this writer has been involved with creating, improving and protecting since 2006. Not always successfully.

HB 147 would end screening process for immigration status

If Clark and his co-sponsors were to be successful in putting the R Street ‘free market’ reciprocity ideology into state law as currently written , the process for screening out black market labor goes away. It is indisputable that making life difficult for illegal immigration results in a reduction of illegal aliens and HB 147 makes Georgia more hospitable to that group.

Shorter: “So what even more illegal aliens are flocking to Georgia to set up businesses to hire more illegal aliens – we are making mo’ money and are number one for business!”

Clark’s bill is gathering growing criticism. Dismantling longstanding state law aimed at preventing black market labor from accessing professional licenses is not a “real solution” to the fact that American families are struggling to make ends meet.

The slippery slope theory in politics dictates that soon after a bill like HB147 becomes law we would watch as the same reciprocity concept will be pushed for foreign-issued professional licenses.

International reciprocity on drivers licenses already here

Most Georgians have no idea that while we do still require a vision test, the Georgia Department of Drivers Services (DDS) already does reciprocity for drivers licenses issued by the Republic of South Korea. Because “number one for business…”

Center for Immigration Studies

DREAMers’ are just the bait; “citizenship for all 11 million, or however many” illegal aliens there are here is the hoo

By Andrew R. Arthur on November 17, 2022

On November 16, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) held a press conference in front of the Capitol in which he called for amnesty for “DREAMers”, aliens brought illegally to the United States as children. As he did so, however, he pulled back the curtain on his end game – to “get a path to citizenship for all 11 million, or however many undocumented, there are here”. The DREAMers are the bait, while a full and total amnesty is the hook.

DREAMers, In Brief. Amnesty legislation for aliens who arrived in their youth has a long, but not particularly successful pedigree. Here’s a brief recap.

In August 2001, then-Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) introduced a bipartisan “DREAM Act”, which included 18 cosponsors. That bill would have granted amnesty to aliens unlawfully present for five years who entered under the age of 21, and who met certain work and educational requirements.

The timing of that bill could not have been worse, because less than six weeks later, the September 11 attacks showed how foolhardy such blanket amnesties were. Nonetheless, similar “DREAM Acts” were subsequently introduced in later Congresses.

One bears special note. In March 2009, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) offered up the “DREAM Act of 2009” during the 111th Congress.

At that time, Barack Obama was president, Democrats held an overwhelming majority in the House, and from September 24, 2009 (when Democrat Paul Kirk was appointed to fill the seat of the late Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy) through February 4, 2010 (when Republican Scott Brown was elected to fill Kennedy’s seat), Democrats held a filibuster-proof majority of 60 seats in the Senate.

Obama’s fellow Democrats could have passed any bill they wanted – including and in particular the DREAM Act of 2009 – without any Republican votes at all. But that bill went nowhere. Cosponsor and then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) did not even bring it up for a vote in committee.

That said, two Republican senators – Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) – were cosponsors of the DREAM Act of 2009, so they probably would have blocked a filibuster even during the months Democrats only controlled a measly 59 seats in the upper chamber.

Obama blamed Republicans for the failure to pass a DREAM Act, but the fault really lies with him and congressional Democrats alone – DREAM Act legislation simply was not a priority for a party that held a hammerlock on the legislative process.

The popularity of legislation to “protect” the DACA population has been a key talking point for years (I was the punching boy for Democrats at a House hearing on the issue in March 2019), but let’s face it – if it really were all that popular, it would have been a shoo-in in the 111th Congress.

DACA. The failure of DREAM Act legislation led to a program called “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” or DACA. It grants quasi-legal status to aliens who entered the United States while under the age of 16 before June 15, 2007, who are currently under the age of 41, who meet certain educational standards, and have not been convicted of certain crimes.

DACA was not created by Congress, or even by executive order or executive action (for what that is worth). It’s the product of a memo issued by then-DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano on June 15, 2012. In my considered legal opinion, Napolitano lacked the authority to create DACA (the Fifth Circuit ruled in October that the program is unlawful, but the Supreme Court has yet to weigh in), but in any event, it sets a bad precedent.

Want proof? Here’s what the editorial board of the Washington Post had to say when President Obama was considering expanding DACA to include parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents in 2014:

The president should think twice. Some of the same Democrats and pro-immigrant advocates urging him to protect millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation would be outraged if a Republican president took a similarly selective approach to enforcing the laws — say, those that guarantee voting rights or prohibit employment discrimination.

Obama ignored the Post editorial board and created something called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). DAPA proved to be a bridge too far for Texas and several other states, who successfully sued to block its implementation.

Despite all of this, DACA continues, and the Biden administration recently issued a new rule, effective October 31, “to preserve and fortify” the decade-old program.

A Sympathetic Population. The DACA population is admittedly sympathetic. The vast majority of the approximately 650,000 current DACA beneficiaries were removable a decade ago, but in the intervening years they have been living in a quasi-legal status thanks to some questionable administrative actions.

Even President Trump, in his 2018 State of the Union address, offered up a plan to legalize not just DACA recipients but also a total of 1.8 million “DACA-eligible” aliens – more or less the same individuals covered by the DREAM Act…. please read the rest here at the CIS website.