Maybe it's a good idea. It might get sex traffickers off the street. But it's certainly not a perfect solution.
The article says, if a trafficker has failed to file W-2s for five women (employees), the maximum penalty would be 10 years in prison per failure to file, a total of 50 years
But if you can prove that the guy has 5 women employees, can't you prove what their profession is and in turn prove what his profession is? It might be easier to prove that the guy hasn't been filing the right forms, but what happens to the women and girls (many of whom Grassley's office says are ages 13-17)? Are they just swept up by another pimp?
Also, the article says that state law enforcement doesn't target these folks - but hasn't Bush's budgets cut state and local law enforcement grants by quite a bit in recent years? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this is Bush's fault - the Congress has to approve the damn budgets. Nor am I saying that the federal government should be singlehandedly funding state and local law enforcement agencies. But if state law enforcement grants are cut, and states' budgets are being strained as it is because more and more of the medicare burden is being placed on the states' plates, where is the money going to come from to make up the deficit in poorer states like mine?
Sorry my nearly incoherent post, I'm got a migraine today.
Commenting by HaloScan
