Tancredo for President -- Official Blog

Clinton on Illegal Aliens Driver's Licenses in NY

In case you missed it, Hillary Clinton tried to shy away from her support for illegal aliens getting driver's licenses last night in the MSNBC debate. 

You can see her try to take a tough national security stance to prepare for the general election.  It's a pretty smart strategy, take her lumps from her Democratic colleagues now in order to appear strong in a general election against a credible Republican. 

She is also trying to shy away from her weak stance on immigration because, once again, she would get hammered by a Republican counterpart such as Tom Tancredo who has worked his entire career to protect this countrywith immigration reform.

There will be two ways to defeat her if she is the nominee: through national security and immigration.

Take a look at the transcript and corresponding video:

Sen. Clinton: I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Gov. Spitzer is trying to do it. And we have failed....

Sen. Dodd: “Wait a minute, no, no, no. You said yes, you thought it made sense to do it.

Sen. Clinton: “No, I didn't, Chris, but the point is, what are we going to do with all these illegal immigrants who are (driving )?''

BP will begin punishing illegal crossers

By JULIAN AGUILAR , LAREDO MORNING TIMES

Saying the U.S. Border Patrol is ready to send a message to people who use the Laredo area as a gateway for illegal activity, Laredo Sector Chief Patrol Agent Carlos X. Carrillo officially announced the agency's zero-tolerance policy against undocumented immigrants."On October 30, the U.S. Border Patrol Laredo Sector will launch an initiative we call Streamline-Laredo," Carrillo said Friday morning. "Under this program, any alien who illegally enters the United States in the Laredo Sector at locations designated for zero-tolerance will be prosecuted in federal court." The penalty for illegal entry, according to a fact sheet from U.S. Customs and Border Protection, is a misdemeanor for the first offense, which carries a maximum sentence of 180 days. Any subsequent offense is a felony, the statement reads. The program is patterned after initiatives in Del Rio and Yuma, Ariz., which have been credited with decreasing illegal entries while increasing illegal drug seizures along the border. "It's not a Republican issue, it's not a Democrat issue," said U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo. "We're talking about implementing the law. … It pretty much eliminates the catch-and-release policy." Cuellar added that he acknowledges that at first there will be a spike in the number of apprehensions, but said the judicial process will be accelerated and that the U.S. Marshals will be given all the resources they need to assist in the initiative. After word spreads, he added, the illegal traffic will decrease. U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, said securing the border was vital to national security, and added that the law has been in the books since 1952. Culberson also referred to Muslim extremists groups that may look to the southern border as a possible path to enter the United States. He said the result of a terrorist attack by a person who sneaked in through Mexico would be disastrous. "The affect would be catastrophic," Culberson said. "The reaction would be so strong that the border would become militarized." Carrillo and Cuellar said, however, that there has been no evidence of terrorist activity along the Laredo border, though Cuellar said the possibility exists. The officials added the issue of bed space in jails has been addressed, and that U.S. Marshals have contacted regional detention facilities regarding that matter. Cuellar however, did not divulge which regional facilities had been contacted. "We're not going to give you the names of what specific ones," Cuellar said. The congressman added that local or regional facilities with overcrowding issues would obviously not be considered. "We're going to use the facilities that are already in place," Deputy U.S. Marshal Mark McPherson said. "We've (identified) other resources outside of (the) direct Laredo area. … Some are county facilities, some are private. If a facility is full, we're not going to force the facilities to take extra (detainees.)" Cuellar added that by the beginning of 2009, when the federal government may again consider building a border wall in Laredo, the results of the streamline operation may be successful enough that a wall will no longer be considered.

AMNESTY IS BACK

Tomorrow Senator Durbin will try to push the DREAM Act through AGAIN.  For those who don't know, this act will give amnesty to a few million illegal aliens.

According to NumbersUSA.com, we only have 25 anti-amnesty votes right now, with the rest committed to amnesty or on the fence.  They need 60 votes to prevent a filibuster and pass this act. 

Last time you shut down the switchboards calling your Senators, please do it again!  Call the Senate switchboard at (202) 224-3121.

For the latest on the DREAM Act:

McCain Says Supporting Immigration Legislation Hurt Campaign

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aNe5cj3K4ccM&refer=home

By Nicholas Johnston

Oct. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Republican presidential candidate John McCain said his support of legislation to give illegal immigrants a way to gain legal status has hurt his campaign.

McCain, a U.S. senator from Arizona, was a major supporter of immigration legislation that died in the Senate in June because of opposition from other Republicans.

The senator said he is now committed to making sure the borders are secure before implementing broader changes to U.S. immigration law. ``I got the message,'' he said in an interview on ``Fox News Sunday.''

McCain's presidential campaign has suffered from low poll ratings in the early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire, and poor fundraising. He trails former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani in money and public support.

McCain, 71, said he hasn't decided whether he will accept public financing for his campaign and said borrowing money ``is not something I would prefer to do'' though he is ``not going to rule anything out.''

Prince William approves laws denying illegals

This is the County where my home town is located, so this literally hits home for me.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071017/METRO/110170093/1001

Prince William County, Va., early this morning gave final approval to some of the nation's most stringent immigration laws after yesterday's Board of County Supervisors meeting.
At 2:30 a.m., after more than 12 hours of testimony from hundreds of residents and others, the eight-member board unanimously approved measures to deny county services to illegal aliens and authorize police to check the immigration status in all arrests if there is probable cause to think that a suspect has violated federal immigration law.

Dream Act back in Senate! Help Stop Amnesty!

For those who have not heard, the Senate is once again sttempting to pass the Dream Act, which stands for "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2007".

If this is successfully attached to a Department of Defense authorization bill (HR 1585) illegal aliens will receive amnesty and be able to receive IN-STATE TUITION!

These amendments will most likely be voted on either today or tomorrow.

Read the floor speech by sponsor Sen. Durbin here.

We need you to do your part, contact your Senator!

Send a free fax to your Senator

Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121

For more info on the Dream Act click here.

Immigration Update: No Amnesty Until 2013?

From yesterday's Washington Times:

Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, an architect of the Democratic campaign that regained control of the House last year, says his party will not attempt comprehensive immigration reform until at least the second term of a prospective Democratic president.

So no amnesty until 2013? Immigration Chronicles (a blog by the Houston Chronicle) rightly questions "why would Emanuel want to wait until the lame duck term of a Democratic president? Is he too worried about backlash at the ballots from voters if his party ushers in amnesty for illegal immigrants?" An accurate answer is yes, based on how a few of the Democrats up for re-election in 2008 switched their amnesty vote last month.

Immigration Update: YEP! The First Domino is Down

New York City: The next New Haven.

Not that it matters anyway, NYC is a sanctuary city.

Immigration Update: The New Illegal Alien Safe Haven

It goes like this: New Haven, Conn., is first U.S. city to offer ID cards to illegal immigrants.

Bob Luciani, a teacher from Woodbridge, said he is concerned that that other cities may do what New Haven has done.

"It's going to metastasize across all over the country. I think this is totally illegal,'' he said. "If we don't go by laws, then we're going to have anarchy.''

----------

The ID cards stand in contrast to new laws or proposals in more than 90 cities or counties around the nation prohibiting landlords from leasing to illegal immigrants, penalizing businesses that employ them or training police to enforce immigration laws.

In defiance of the law. I hear the dominos begin to fall.

Immigration Update: Continental Divide

Could our nation increasingly look like a medieval landscape of towns that enforce federal immigration laws and those that ignore it?

New Haven is now handing out ID cards to illegal aliens, in hopes of integrating them into the community.

The idea: integrate illegal immigrants into the community, protect them from crime that can happen because of a lack of documentation, and encourage them to be more willing to report crimes to police. Reaction to the first-of-a-kind program has been swift and sharp, illustrating the wide divide in US public opinion over the issue.

Different from New Haven are Virginia's Prince William and Loudoun Counties and Waukegan, Illinois.

Immigration: No Work, No Stay

This weekend's edition of USA Today features this story on the front page of the Money section:

Wilfredo Montes came from Texas to this city about a year and a half ago for good work and good pay: gutting homes and clearing debris from neighborhoods left waterlogged by Hurricane Katrina. He worked six or seven days a week, for up to $15 an hour.

These days, Montes often finds work only two or three days a week, and the pay rate has shrunk by nearly half. Yet he's staying, at least for now. The hourly wage still far exceeds the federal minimum of $5.15. In fact, the $8 for an hour's work is nearly as much as he'd earn in a full day back in Chinandega, Nicaragua, where he used to sell steaming plates of rice and beans.

----------

When he doesn't find work, Montes tells himself he'll return to Nicaragua in the fall. On other days, when he has a job, he's certain he'll stay a few more years. Today, he didn't find work. He hopes his luck will change. He knows it could be worse. "I don't have money," he says. "But, thanks to God, I have good health."

Immigration Update: In the Crosshairs

As expected, here's a USA Today article that highlights state localities cracking down on illegal immigration:

Under Green Bay's ordinance, which took effect June 23, a firm can lose its business license if it hires illegal workers. Fradette says illegal workers have "undercut" the city's union workforce.

Beaufort County, S.C., plans to begin auditing employment records in August by sampling 25% of its 5,000 businesses, says county administrator Gary Kubic. The county passed an ordinance in December that says a business could have its license suspended for hiring illegal workers.

A Georgia law that took effect July 1 requires companies with at least 500 workers that do business with the government to verify the legal status of new workers. Other states, including Colorado and Arizona, also have cracked down on employers.

On July 1, business owners renewing licenses in Payson, Ariz., began signing affidavits that they employ only legal workers. "We're trying to level the playing field," Mayor Bob Edwards says.

Immigration Update: A Mixed Blessing

The federal government has failed to enforce immigration laws of the recent past. So, if Congress passed an immigration bill with no amnesty, would it be enforced in Lou Barletta or Garrett Chamberlain style? State and local officials are now proactive on immigration reform. Maybe it's better that way.

Immigration Update: Resistance is Futile?

This week's edition of The Economist mentions the consequences of the collapse of the Senate amnesty bill:

Liberal and Hispanic enclaves may follow the example of National City, on the outskirts of San Diego, and declare themselves to be “sanctuary cities” where police officers are told not to quiz people about their immigration status. Others—probably a greater number—will tell the cops to do precisely that, or enact other laws against illegal immigrants and the people who house and employ them.

And, with the demise of the immigration bill that Senator Graham -- or, "Senator Grahamnesty" -- championed, Graham (as opined by a New York Sun article) must now think: "If the conservative base could bring this bill down, what could they do to me?" Check this:

A recent poll conducted in his home state showed that just 21% of voters side with him on the subject, whereas 63% disapprove of his stance. His personal approval rating has plummeted to 31%.

Immigration Update: The Way Forward

I don't need to explain this one. From The Hill:

House Republicans are planning to use the ashes of the Senate immigration bill to resurrect the debate on border security.

----------

Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said he expected many of his members to line up behind a bill crafted by King and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), ranking member on the Judiciary Committee.

----------

A draft of the Smith-King legislation includes an increase in the size of the Border Patrol and would boost the number of Customs and Border Protection Officers at U.S. ports by 1,000 people over four years. It would also expedite the removal of individuals in the country illegally, make English the national language and refine the system that verifies the identities of those applying for employment in the United States.

Immigration Update: "Solutionless"?

Jonah Goldberg adds to the collection of editorials decrying the lack of sense in the immigration reform debate:

Historians may well look back on last week's defeat of the immigration bill as a watershed moment. It was, for good or ill, a milestone in America's transformation into a "normal" country. Normal countries have arguments about their national identity and immigration's effect on it. In normal countries, it's not illegitimate to suggest that too many immigrants, or too many immigrants of a specific origin, may upset the social peace or do damage to the national culture. In America, however, to raise such concerns is to open yourself to charges of racism, bigotry, nativism and all-around hate.

Kris Kobach, a law professor who represented Hazleton, gave three suggestions to strengthen current immigration law, in yesterday's Washington Times:

First, Congress should mandate that all employers use the Employment Eligibility Verification System (formerly known as the Basic Pilot Program). This is an Internet-based system that allows any employer to type in an employee's name, date of birth and identification number (Social Security number, alien employment authorization number, etc.) to find out whether the employee is authorized to work in the United States. It's fast too — in 92 percent of the cases, the employer receives an answer within two seconds. In most of the remaining cases, an answer comes back by the next day.

----------

Second, Congress must stop the proliferation of sanctuary cities — municipalities that refuse to inform the federal government when they arrest illegal aliens in the course of their law enforcement duties.

Third, there is another loophole that needs to be fixed. In 1996, Congress enacted a law that prohibited states from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless all U.S. citizens attending college in the state also received in-state tuition.

And, despite this Arizona Republic editorial listing the wrong ways to go about immigration reform, it still makes a solid point:

It strikes me that the Fourth of July is a good day to ponder that fact. This is a country founded by great and courageous men, based on bedrock principles of fairness and equality.

What we seem to have today are wimps and wannabes who spend most of their time with a wet finger in the air and who are more interested in career than country.

Two hundred and thirty-one years ago, our leaders brought us the Declaration of Independence. Last week, our leaders in Congress brought us a declaration of incompetence. They can't figure out what to do about illegal immigration so they're punting until 2009.

Immigration Update: The Amnesty Aura

The Tanc gave a few town hall meetings this past weekend (see pictures in previous posts), and immigration and border security was the hottest topic (not by The Tanc, but by the audience). Yes, Tancredo talked about more than one issue, but, at each town hall meeting, when I asked at least a dozen people why they supported The Tanc immigration was invariably prime.

Peter Brown points out that the illegal alien amnesty was defeated by Republicans and Democrats alike. He's highlighting a key fact we must know:

The immigration mess showed that not every divisive issue in American politics is partisan. Much has been made of the split among Republicans over immigration, but in the end it was the division among Senate Democrats that was the most surprising.

Nevertheless, we must be prepared for the return. It's not over yet:

Even as the Senate dealt a likely fatal blow to President Bush's push to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, some Democrats and Republicans began talking about trying to pass narrower, less ambitious pieces.

Empowered by Thursday's 46-53 vote that effectively killed a bipartisan compromise bill dismissed by many conservatives as amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, many Republicans now are reverting to their key priority: increased enforcement at the Southwest border and in the U.S. interior.

And Democrats, for their part, are considering offering the DREAM Act, which would grant citizenship to illegal immigrant students. And they are looking at ways to address acute labor shortages in agriculture by bringing in more foreign farm workers and placing them on a path to legal permanent residence.

Michael Barone interestingly observes that the majority of Americans will accept amnesty, if the government is trusted on enforcement of borders and immigration laws:

As pollster Scott Rasmussen has shown, the opposition to the bill was fueled less by anger at "amnesty," the idea that illegals would be rewarded for breaking the law, than it was by an astringent skepticism that it would provide real border security. Americans may be willing to forgive those who were, by the actions of government and the inactions of voters, effectively invited to violate the law. But they don't seem to be willing to trust a government to enforce the law when it hasn't seemed to.

----------

There's not much hope that Congress will pass a big immigration bill this year or next. But the administration, by charging ahead on border security and setting the stage for a national identity card, can move the public toward accepting a comprehensive immigration bill in the years ahead.

A New York Times editorial on Saturday notes immigration's role in this presidential race:

The [immigration] debate will surely dominate the presidential campaign, where the odds of reasoned discussion and principled leadership are mighty slim.

Immigration Update: Remember the Embers

An amnesty bill for 12-20 million illegal aliens will be back. But when?

The Seattle Times quotes:

"Immigration is going to have to wait until we get a new president and a new Congress," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said after a 46-53 procedural vote Thursday derailed efforts to move the bill toward final passage.

It's now more likely that if immigration reform is ever passed, it will not be one large, comprehensive bill but a series of small bills dealing with each aspect (border security, guest worker program, etc.).

If immigration reform doesn't happen in the House or the Senate, Americans won't wait on Washington. The Salt Lake Tribune reports:

Utah political and community leaders say that the demise of an immigration reform bill in the U.S. Senate on Thursday, a defeat that could push back an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws beyond 2008, could mean one thing: The states will continue to be stuck dealing with immigration woes.

Anyway, if amnesty is as popular as the Senate spins it, check THIS out:

Eleven senators - four Democrats and seven Republicans - who voted in favor of last year's Senate immigration bill, which died in the House, voted against this year's version. All of them are up for re-election in 2008.

Immigration Update: Nice Job All

CNN reports:

On the day of the immigration vote, phone lines in the Senate crashed due to an “increased volume” of calls, the Sergeant-at-Arms confirmed to CNN.

Immigration Update: The Grand Bargain's Grave

Click HERE to see the list of who voted for cloture and who did not.

Also, from the Los Angeles Times:

The legislation's demise makes the fate of immigration reform in the near term uncertain. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) made it clear to Senate leaders and the White House that she would not bring up immigration legislation unless the Senate passed it first.

Where do we go from here? From the BBC:

The Senate is now due to go into summer recess and is unlikely to get something through in time before that.

It could try to resurrect legislation, but Thursday's vote was probably the last serious attempt to get immigration reform through Congress under this presidency, says the BBC's Jamie Coomarasamy in Washington.

No reason and no room for complacency. We have to keep the fight up. Resurrection is still possible.

Immigration Update: AMNESTY DEFEATED!

The Associated Press reports:

The Senate drove a stake Thursday through President Bush's plan to legalize millions of unlawful immigrants, likely postponing major action on immigration until after the 2008 elections.

The bill's supporters fell 14 votes short of the 60 needed to limit debate and clear the way for final passage of the legislation, which critics assailed as offering amnesty to illegal immigrants. The vote was 46 to 53 in favor of limiting the debate.

(note: more details as they emerge!)

Immigration Update: Nation in the Balance

Senate Republicans turning left. Senate Democrats acting right. The New York Times reports:

In narrowly winning her seat last year, Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri ran hard against what she saw as a flawed approach in Congress to dealing with illegal immigration. Ms. McCaskill, a Democratic newcomer, says she is not about to change her view now.

----------

Her compatriots in opposition are Senators Jim Webb of Virginia and Jon Tester of Montana. All three represent Republican-leaning states and are breaking with their leadership and most of their Democratic colleagues on the legislation, whose fate in the Senate could be determined on Thursday after a day of votes on amendments left the outcome up in the air on Wednesday.

----------

And that is just what the three lawmakers are determined to avoid, even though they will not be back on the ballot until 2012. “This was a big issue in Missouri,” Ms. McCaskill said. “I had a consistent and clear message during the campaign, and I feel obligated to act on that.”

Also, yesterday, from the Associated Press:

The Senate on Wednesday killed a Republican proposal to require all adult illegal immigrants to return home temporarily in order to qualify for permanent lawful status in this country.

----------

Also defeated was a Democratic bid to restrict legal status to those who have been in the United States for four years.

Now, many eyes are on the House -- Would they pass a massive amnesty? Well, hopefully a harbinger, The Hill reported two days ago that a resolution "resolved the House GOP Conference disapproves of the Senate immigration bill.” A motion to block the resolution was voted down by a vote of 114-23.

Immigration Update: No Brakes on Illegal Alien Amnesty

On Friday, the amnesty bill is expected to officially pass in the Senate. But, around yesterday evening, the New York Times reported:

The Senate immigration bill’s chances of passage seemed in doubt late this afternoon as several lawmakers signaled that they were undecided about supporting the legislation.

The bill is in more danger “than I thought a few hours ago,” Senator Christopher Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, told Bloomberg News. His comments came after the Senate voted down several attempts to make the immigration bill stricter, including one that would have barred illegal immigrants from a chance for eventual citizenship.

But the bill’s very fate was in doubt as senators who voted Tuesday to allow the bill to go forward said today that they were either now against allowing a vote on final passage or were inclined that way.

Why is the Senate bill in jeopardy by some of the same Senators that voted for cloture? Because: Right now, dozens of amendments are on the table and a few Senators want their amendment included in the bill or else they will not vote for it. MSNBC explains this, using Virginia Senator Jim Webb as an example:

“I have an amendment that I think will save the bill,” Webb told reporters Tuesday. “If my amendment succeeds, I will more than likely vote for it — unless something else happens on the bill.”

Later he added, “If my amendment succeeds, I’ll support the bill and if not, I won’t — unless there’s something similar in there and I don’t see it in the other amendments” that will be voted on in the next three days.

So far, immigration remains hot this 2008 election cycle. Check this out, from The Oregonian:

Illegal immigration, which has dominated local and national headlines lately, has become a top concern of Oregonians, according to a new statewide poll.

And, in Florida:

The sheriff's department has developed a remarkably effective and controversial way of catching illegal immigrants: Deputies in patrol cars pull up to a construction site in force, and watch and see who runs.

Those who take off are chased down and arrested on charges such as trespassing, for cutting through someone else's property, or loitering, for hiding out in someone's yard, or reckless driving, for speeding off in a car.

Immigration Update: AMNESTY ADVANCES!

From the Los Angeles Times:

Two and a half weeks after the push for immigration reform collapsed on Capitol Hill, the Senate today narrowly voted to revive the controversial legislation.

The procedural vote passed 64 to 35, just four votes over the 60 required.

----------

All six presidential candidates -- Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.); Sam Brownback (R-Kan.); Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.); Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.); John McCain (R-Ariz.); and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) -- voted yes.

Who voted for cloture? Who didn't? Cloture brings the debate to an end so the bill can pass. Complete list HERE.

(note: I'll bring you the latest news on this massive amnesty.)

Immigration Update: In The House

The House released their version of immigration reform, from the Chicago Tribune:

In an attempt to derail the compromise immigration bill working its way through the Senate, a group of House Republicans unveiled an alternative measure Tuesday that takes a harder line against immigration that would block illegal immigrants from becoming citizens while directing the Bush administration to enforce current laws.

The article also includes this nugget -- about the many first-term Democrats that are conservative on immigration:

But even with Democrats in control this year, the fate of immigration in the House is not certain, as several first-term Democrats from conservative districts have indicated they would not be able to vote with party leaders on a comprehensive immigration bill.

Immigration Update: The Senate Immigration Proposal

Too busy watching American Idol? No worries -- I've been monitoring the immigration news throughout the evening. Here's an awesome editorial from Tony Blankley in the Washington Times:

Consider the current arguments about the immigration bill. For oh so long, the supporters of the bill have been making two points: 1) It is impossible for the U.S. government to actually identify and round up all the illegals in the country; and, 2) a fence on the border is bound to be ineffective as well as immoral. Indeed opponents of the fence have idiotically compared it to the Berlin Wall — although one protects a free country from illegal intrusion while the other kept enslaved people from escaping their slavery.

Now, suddenly, these same people claim that the same previously nitwit bureaucracy will not only be able to find all 12 million (or 20 million) illegals, but will be able to flawlessly run background checks, and to positively identify each individual as well as monitor all American businesses to make sure no new illegals are being hired and the newly legal are in perfect compliance with their limited status.

Also, changes have been made throughout today on the Senate immigration proposal. Check them out in the Chicago Tribune.

Immigration Update: The Nightmare Bill

Tons of phone calls today. And tons of e-mails about this.