June 15, 2006 2:45 PM

U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo on immigration

Mark(Q) If there's an overriding theme of our The Border Within series it is that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials seem overwhelmed and in a Crisis of the Day mode. Does that surprise you? An e-mailed question from Chuck Curtis asks if either the House or the Senate immigration bills including funding and training for more ICE agents.
Congressman_Tancredo(A) First, thanks for inviting me to this chat. ICE in crisis mode? No, it doesn't surprise me at all. I have been saying for years that for various reasons the agency is dysfunctional. Certainly, part of it is that they are understaffed and overextended. As I believe you guys reported in today's lead immigration story, there are only 50 or so investigators for the entire 4-state area, and they spend much of their time making rounds at jails to find violent criminal aliens who they will likely deport. That doesn't leave much time or many resources available to do the other things that they need to do to get the situation under control--things like the raid they announced last night or the IFCO worksite raids that they did a couple of months ago (of course, these can't be cosmetic raids -- enforcement as PR -- they have to make a concerted effort to scare employers into following the law). In seperate legislation the House a few years ago authorized several thousand new enforcement personnel which the White House never hired.

Congressman_Tancredo(P) sorry about that long answer!

Mark(Q) In addition to criminal immigrants who have either slipped through the ICE cracks or returned illegally after being deported, our series has focused on those who are here illegally but have compelling personal stories, e.g., the wife of a U.S. soldier serving in Iraq. How much discretion would you like to see ICE officials exercise in cases where persons here illegally have committed no other crimes?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) The law is the law. There will always be "compelling stories" and we have an entire legal field (immigration lawyers) who are paid a lot of money to make their clients' stories compelling. I've got a compelling story for you: how about the millions waiting patiently in consulate lines all over the world to get here the right way? If the law is the law, it needs to be enforced uniformally, "compelling stories" notwithstanding.
rroseto(C) Great response!

Tracey(Q) A huge problem is the children being born here by illegal parents.They become instant citizens and automatically entitled to free services in which the parents benefit.They have 4,5,6 or more children.What can be done to rectify this situation.It's not right and American citizens feel if the parents are illegal the children should be illegal.How can this be changed?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) Thank you for the question Tracey, you touched on an important issue that doesn't get as much play in the media as it should. Due to an old Supreme Court decision (if I remember correctly, the case in question was decided in the 1800s), the federal government has said that the 14th Amendment obligates the US to grant citizenship to any child born on US soil -- regardless of whether their parents are illegal. So-called 'birthright citizenship' was clearly not intended by the framers' of the 14th amendment (in the Senate's passage, one of the framers even expressly addressed birthright citizenship and said it should not be automatic for tourists who come here legally), but the Court's opinion hasn't been re-heard since then, so it is standing law. Birthright citizenship creates a tremendous incentive for illegal aliens to birth "anchor babies" in the US -- as they are in their final term, they either sneak into the US or come here as tourists, birth a child who is then automatically a citizen, and then can receive all sorts of government benefits because of their child's status. Also, ironically, ICE doesn't usually press deportation on families that have legal children, so anchor babies serve as a practical shield for the families' illegal status. It has gotten so bad in Los Angeles, for example, that one recent estimate shows that half of all live births in that county are to mothers who are illegal. We came very close in negotiations with House leadership to insert a provision declaring birthright citizenship null and void (which would then trigger a legal battle), but it didn't make it into the final bill in December. I will keep pressing this issue.

rroseto(Q) What are the chances that the Senate's version of their immigration reform will get through?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) 0. Well, I shouldn't be so confident. 10%? There are a lot of hurdles that have to be overcome to get ANY bill, let alone the Senate's bill. First off, there's a complicated jurisdictional issue that is keeping the Senate from even getting their bill to a House-Senate Conference Committee. Second, Speaker Hastert has suggested holding hearings on the Senate bill in the House, which would draw the debate out further. Third, the clock is running out -- there are two weeks before July 4 work period (when all Congressmen go home to their districts and we're not in session). And July 31 begins our August district work period which lasts the entire month. After August, we're getting too close to elections to get much done, let alone something as controversial as immigration. Besides all that, the crux of the Senate plan -- amnesty / a path to citizenship for illegal aliens -- is a non-starter in the House.

FedUp(Q) Do you think that the creation of Homeland Security and the breakup of ICE into two separate entities has made the operational problems worse?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on that. ICE has its issues (see above posting) but so does the Border Patrol. I think the Border Patrol's biggest problem is that its leadership has (or until recently had) a resistance to actually go after illegal aliens aggresively. For instance, I have talked to USBP agents who have been told to "stand on the X" and not make arrests in order to play with arrest numbers for political reasons.

fontanero(Q) A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll today shows that by 50% to 33% American support President Bush's view on immigration reform, a view echoed by U.S. business and leaders of the Democratic Party. That is, enhancing border security should be accompanied by a guest-worker program for prospective immigrants and those who have been in the U.S. for at least two years. Other surveys mirror this result. You're on the wrong side of this issue, aren't you, even as you keep insisting your views reflect the majority of Americans?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) I did see that poll this morning. Nothing against NBC News, but the Wall Street Journal blasts me in a lead editorial just about every week, so I'd be careful in taking their poll as the be all and end all on the subject. If you ask Americans if they support granting a "path to citizenship" to "undocumented American workers" who are "hard working" and "haven't broken any other laws" if they pay back taxes and learn English then, yes, I think 50 percent of Americans or so will support that. But if you tell them about what the Senate bill actually does -- including increasing legal immigration by more than 60 million persons over 20 years -- then you get a much different response. Furthermore, I haven't seen a poll that tests our key proposition -- that the laws of this country should be substantially enforced before any new guest worker plan goes into effect -- that doesn't show a majority of Americans favor our side of things.

rroseto(Q) How much good will 500 miles of fence do?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) It won't solve the problem of illegal immigration, but it's a start. I have long advocated a complete fence -- in part made of steel, in part "virtual" using sensors and UAVs where appropriate -- from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean. I should say also that even if I had my way with a complete fence, the problem wouldn't be solved fully. We also have to go after employers who are driving illegal immigration, and we have to enlist the help of state and local law enforcement. I could go on.

Mark(Q) You "cautiously applauded" the ICE raids yesterday that rounded up more than 2,100 persons who were in the country illegally. You also said it "does not absolve ICE of its long-neglected duty to make law enforcement the rule and not the exception." Are you confident in the leadership of ICE?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) No I am not. Ms Myers, the head of ICE, was appointed to lead an agency with thousands of employees when her only prior experience was heading a government office with I believe fewer than 200 persons under her management, and with no other experience in border issues. I think her appointment says a lot about how the Administration values border security. I am always going to applaud the government when they round up murderers and gang members, and I think almost all Americans applauded yesterday's actions. But, we can't lose sight of the agency's history, and, during the applause, we can't forget to ask the question: "Why wasn't this done before?"

JackDamrill(Q) Mr. Tancredo, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you on this issue. I'd like to ask you why you believe this issue is so important now when our country faces many more important issues. Most of my friends and family have never even encountered an illegal immigrant, so we don't really see how this affects us. And, if the price of a head of lettuce goes to $10 you, sir, will be villified by the very people who are singing your praises now.
Congressman_Tancredo(A) Well, there's a lot to answer in your question. First, I bet that you have encountered an illegal alien, although you probably didn't know it. In fact, whether you've encountered one or not, illegal immigration affects all taxpaying Americans. Your taxes are higher because you have to pay for the medical costs of illegal aliens who have a right to visit any emergency room in the country and receive care (even though their ailment may not be an emergency). Your taxes are higher because illegal aliens have a legal right to public education, even though they do not pay taxes for the mostpart. I doubt you or I will ever have to pay $10 for a head of lettuce. Industries that claim that they cannot function without illegal aliens have two choices: either they mechanize or outsource (in fact, many of these industries COULD pay the going wage for legal workers, but they choose not to because -- surprise -- they benefit economically from paying substandard wages). A good example of this is what happened in the bracero program in the 1950s in California. When that guest worker program was disbanded, many ag businesses said they couldn't survive without the cheap foreign labor they had grown used to. But when legal market conditions forced them to go back to the drawing board, they came up with plants that could be harvested with machines and thus became more efficient and competitive.

Sayitaintso(Q) Should we build a fence on the Canadian border, too? If I'm a terrorist, and you build a fence along Mexico, first thing I do is go through Minnesota.
Congressman_Tancredo(A) You're right -- building a fence on the southern border would stop the massive flow of illegal aliens into the U.S. and it would begin to address the national security issue of porous borders, but terrorists and drug runners would come across the northern border. The House bill includes a study of a fence on the Northern border. The terrain is much different in the North than in the South, but through fencing and sensors, we need to secure both borders.
slick joined.

Mark(Q) E-mailed question from Ted: I am concerned about the War in Iraq much more than immigration or gay marriage, etc. As someone who grew up in the '60s, I am convinced that we are becoming complacent about the war in Iraq. I would like to see more focus on resolving the issue and getting our troops home. We're spending $2 billion a week and people are risking their lives on something that was mis-represented. I would like to know what Rep. Tancredo thinks we should do about the war.
Congressman_Tancredo(A) We're debating the War on Terror on the House floor right now. No one likes seeing our young men and women in harms way, far, far from home. I visited Iraq several months ago with John Salazar and a few other Congressmen. Despite the media's reports, our troops are in good spirits and the ones I met believe in the work they're doing. We need to get our troops home from Iraq as soon as the job is done, but not a moment before.

FedUp(Q) If the competing bills are not resolved before the election, will this issue just fade away or will it continue to get pushed until we have a bill that Bush would have to either veto or sign?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) Thanks for asking the question, and it will have to be our last one. Again, thanks to the readers for asking questions. It's likely that the bills will not be melded together before the election, but the issue will most certainly not go away because it has reached a boiling point. Elections are supposed to hold politicians accountable and convey a message to our new leaders. In the 50th District of California, Brian Bilbray won solely on securing our borders. If there were ever a district for Democrats to run their "culture of corruption" message, it was in the 50th: it was Duke Cunningham's seat, and, frankly, Brian was a lobbyist for an immigration reform group in DC before returning to California to run for that seat. But illegal immigration so inflamed the voters that they pushed him into office. In Utah, Rep. Chris Cannon, who has supported all sorts of amnesties for illegal immigrants, is on the ropes with a rare GOP primary challenger. So if people at the polls around the country vote against Members who are pro-amnesty and vote for Members who want enforcement-first, I think the elections could serve to break the gridlock in Congress over immigration.

Tommys(Q) Do you ever see the immigration debate blowing over? That there will be a new Monster of the Week?
Congressman_Tancredo(A) The American people won't let Congress off the hook until we've secured our borders. Thanks for your questions.

Mark(P) Thanks to Congressman Tancredo for more than an hour online. And thanks to the questioners. He couldn't get to all the questions and we tried to stay as close to the topic of immigration as possible.