Meet The Press Todd Grills Cruz on Immigration, Never Gets an Answer

[libertybele]

What the article points out (unwittingly) is the absolute need for comprehensive reforms.  Many of the issues noted in the report are and have been part of proposed legislation, including chain migration and acceptance of welfare (means tested) payments.  English requirement was also part of earlier bills as was having a job.

The concerns expressed in your article also apply in general to our increasing spending on welfare and government payout across the board.  Yet illegals have put in over $700 billion into the trust fund which is just sitting there.

Education is a must just as it is with other groups within our Country, and it's obvious from the statistics in your report that those with high school and higher education do much better, thus reducing the drain on government coffers.  Additionally we are running out of labor in the Nation. 

We are not going to deport 11 to 12 million illegals, not now; not ever, even under a Trump or Cruz presidency, which isn't likely.  But we do need to continue to improve on border security, better enforcement in employment, and rather than ignore the issue for another 10 years, deal with it.  Go back to the 2013 or 2007 legislation and seriously work on it with both sides.  Several of the candidates would do that, and hopefully bring this major issue to a close.

It is a fact that the Secure Fence Act was passed by BOTH houses of Congress, yet we have no fence.  Our existing immigration laws need to be enforced instead of disregarded.  IF those two issues were addressed and adhered to, chances are we wouldn't be having this conversation and perhaps the parents of the young girl who was shot by an illegal wouldn't be mourning the loss of their child.

As for the candidate bringing this major issue to a close; Rubio, Bush and Christie's answer is FULL amnesty.  I wouldn't be so quick to assume that Trump or Cruz wouldn't do some type of mass deportation.

[MACVSOG68]

It is a fact that the Secure Fence Act was passed by BOTH houses of Congress, yet we have no fence.  Our existing immigration laws need to be enforced instead of disregarded.  IF those two issues were addressed and adhered to, chances are we wouldn't be having this conversation and perhaps the parents of the young girl who was shot by an illegal wouldn't be mourning the loss of their child.

As for the candidate bringing this major issue to a close; Rubio, Bush and Christie's answer is FULL amnesty.  I wouldn't be so quick to assume that Trump or Cruz wouldn't do some type of mass deportation.

The Act never called for complete fencing along the US-Mexican border.  According to Homeland Security, the original 700 miles in H.R 6061 have been completed along with many of the vehicle barriers and technological improvements called for.  Later bills presented for completion of the fence were never passed, though debated.  Governor Perry was against completion in his state as he felt there were better security options.

You are incorrect that any of those GOP candidates would enact full amnesty, as they would support some type of legalization that had similar restrictions and qualification requirements as those in previous attempts.  And they also continue the move for better border security and other enforcement initiatives.

As for whether Cruz would try to deport 11+ million illegals, it's a joke for him to even think about that.  Eisenhower tried it by sending federal troops through Mexican neighborhoods.  Today there are 34 states with sanctuary cities and the list grows daily.

I have been extremely critical of the left using single incidents to change our entire set of laws and/or culture.  I won't do that on our side of the aisle either.

I believe it's time to quit posturing and start talking.  Unfortunately, the GOP, like the Dems must appeal to a vocal base at least until the primary season is over with.  Then perhaps we can move into real negotiation and compromise mode.

[libertybele]

The Act never called for complete fencing along the US-Mexican border.  According to Homeland Security, the original 700 miles in H.R 6061 have been completed along with many of the vehicle barriers and technological improvements called for.  Later bills presented for completion of the fence were never passed, though debated.  Governor Perry was against completion in his state as he felt there were better security options.

You are incorrect that any of those GOP candidates would enact full amnesty, as they would support some type of legalization that had similar restrictions and qualification requirements as those in previous attempts.  And they also continue the move for better border security and other enforcement initiatives.

As for whether Cruz would try to deport 11+ million illegals, it's a joke for him to even think about that.  Eisenhower tried it by sending federal troops through Mexican neighborhoods.  Today there are 34 states with sanctuary cities and the list grows daily.

I have been extremely critical of the left using single incidents to change our entire set of laws and/or culture.  I won't do that on our side of the aisle either.

I believe it's time to quit posturing and start talking.  Unfortunately, the GOP, like the Dems must appeal to a vocal base at least until the primary season is over with.  Then perhaps we can move into real negotiation and compromise mode.

Yes, not "complete" fencing, buy 700 miles of fencing ... the issue was revisited many years later in the Senate; still discussing what the bill actually meant and why type of fence ...the argument was that some of the areas of proposed fencing already had a fence; though it wasn't what was originally in mind.  So, I'll give you that. 

Bottom line...A sustainable, effective fence needs to be built AND our existing immigration laws need to be built.

IMHO, both Bush and Rubio will lean further left on their immigration policy.  Bush did so when he was governor of Florida; he was one that wouldn't let ICE do their jobs  and Rubio quickly lost his categorization of a conservative in Flroida when he started voting with the left.

Why would Cruz have to go into Mexico?? AFTER a complete fence was built, and enforced, deportation would be quite easy actually.  Those illegals applying for jobs - deportation.  Those illegals applying for  food stamps - deportation.  Those illegals coming into our hospitals - deportation...  Those illegals in prison - deportation.   If the U.S. starts deporting it won't be long before Mexico and those coming in through Mexico would get the message.  I always though a great way to create jobs would be to allow American citizens to train to become deputies with the authority to apprehend illegals and turn over for deportation. 

If ICE was allowed to do their jobs to deport instead of "catch and release", that would be a great start as well as shutting off the "perks" that illegals get that are drawing them here in the first place.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/24/obama-encourages-ice-stand-down-say-former-border-/

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2007/jun/18/jailed_illegal_immigrants_cost_collier_taxpayers_9/?

https://www.numbersusa.com/news/border-patrol-agent-testifies-senate-committee-indicated-6-10-aliens-cross-border

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416545/previously-deported-immigrants-can-now-enter-us-taxpayers-dime-ryan-lovelace

[MACVSOG68]

Yes, not "complete" fencing, buy 700 miles of fencing ... the issue was revisited many years later in the Senate; still discussing what the bill actually meant and why type of fence ...the argument was that some of the areas of proposed fencing already had a fence; though it wasn't what was originally in mind.  So, I'll give you that. 

Bottom line...A sustainable, effective fence needs to be built AND our existing immigration laws need to be built.

IMHO, both Bush and Rubio will lean further left on their immigration policy.  Bush did so when he was governor of Florida; he was one that wouldn't let ICE do their jobs  and Rubio quickly lost his categorization of a conservative in Flroida when he started voting with the left.

Why would Cruz have to go into Mexico?? AFTER a complete fence was built, and enforced, deportation would be quite easy actually.  Those illegals applying for jobs - deportation.  Those illegals applying for  food stamps - deportation.  Those illegals coming into our hospitals - deportation...  Those illegals in prison - deportation.   If the U.S. starts deporting it won't be long before Mexico and those coming in through Mexico would get the message.  I always though a great way to create jobs would be to allow American citizens to train to become deputies with the authority to apprehend illegals and turn over for deportation. 

If ICE was allowed to do their jobs to deport instead of "catch and release", that would be a great start as well as shutting off the "perks" that illegals get that are drawing them here in the first place.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/24/obama-encourages-ice-stand-down-say-former-border-/

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2007/jun/18/jailed_illegal_immigrants_cost_collier_taxpayers_9/?

https://www.numbersusa.com/news/border-patrol-agent-testifies-senate-committee-indicated-6-10-aliens-cross-border

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416545/previously-deported-immigrants-can-now-enter-us-taxpayers-dime-ryan-lovelace

Better border security; more enforcement here in the US; Making ICE do its job.  We agree on those concepts even if not the specifics.  But unless a president Cruz ignores the laws and Congress and acts as Obama is today, he is going to have to deal with Congress on these issues.  Almost everyone wants a comprehensive approach to the whole immigration controversy, not just illegal immigration.  Why is the far right so afraid of embracing resolution discussions that will bring all sides to the table?  Why was a small faction of Republicans afraid to have a vote on it in 2007?

Instead of continuing to drive these millions further underground, why not identify those who are contributing, have families here and are a real part of communities, and give them an opportunity to earn legalization.  Then we can concentrate on the real threats, gang bangers, drug smugglers and dealers, human traffickers, fraud merchants, terrorists and the like.  Continue to enhance the security on the borders, but recognize that in spite of the beliefs of a few here, there are good people living here illegally who aren't represented by the likes of Francisco Sanchez.

Or we can embrace the rhetoric of Cruz and plan on landmines, mass deportations and an end to gay marriage.   

 

[Bigun]

Better border security; more enforcement here in the US; Making ICE do its job.  We agree on those concepts even if not the specifics.  But unless a president Cruz ignores the laws and Congress and acts as Obama is today, he is going to have to deal with Congress on these issues.  Almost everyone wants a comprehensive approach to the whole immigration controversy, not just illegal immigration.  Why is the far right so afraid of embracing resolution discussions that will bring all sides to the table?  Why was a small faction of Republicans afraid to have a vote on it in 2007?

Instead of continuing to drive these millions further underground, why not identify those who are contributing, have families here and are a real part of communities, and give them an opportunity to earn legalization.  Then we can concentrate on the real threats, gang bangers, drug smugglers and dealers, human traffickers, fraud merchants, terrorists and the like.  Continue to enhance the security on the borders, but recognize that in spite of the beliefs of a few here, there are good people living here illegally who aren't represented by the likes of Francisco Sanchez.

Or we can embrace the rhetoric of Cruz and plan on landmines, mass deportations and an end to gay marriage.   

Good! Let's get what we agree on done and working so we can begin to talk about the things we don't agree on!

[MACVSOG68]

Good! Let's get what we agree on done and working so we can begin to talk about the things we don't agree on!

I suspect you may be missing the point.

[Bigun]

I suspect you may be missing the point.

And I suspect that you have been missing the point for a VERY long time now.

The point being that I and millions more like me are no longer falling for the old Wimpy line "I'll gladly pay you on Tuesday for a hamburger today." Fix the border! Truly fix it and make sure it's working THEN we will talk! Not before!

[MACVSOG68]

And I suspect that you have been missing the point for a VERY long time now.

The point being that I and millions more like me are no longer falling for the old Wimpy line "I'll gladly pay you on Tuesday for a hamburger today." Fix the border! Truly fix it and make sure it's working THEN we will talk! Not before!

I've not missed your point at all...for a very long time.  ^-^

What is your metric for "fixing the border"?  And I agree with your Wimpy line.  No one believes that any effort to improve on border security would ever result in realistic talks about what to do with those already here.  So no, it's why all the issues have to be on the table. 

[Free Vulcan]

As we don't have the political will to round them up any more (nor do I necessary want our increasingly statist govt going door to door anyway) I'm all for building a fence, while concurrently enforcing existing law.

With the ones who are here, it's very simple: they get temporary status, and while on it they must have a job (or if they lose it to a layoff, find another within say, 6 to 9 months), no welfare, no convictions above traffic violations.

They get to the back of the line to get some sort of legal status, whether a green card, visa, citizenship, whatever. As long as they're in the process to recieve one of these they are good. If they leave that at any time they're gone.

Employers must verify legal status, anyone who doesn't have it must get a temporary card. They can sponsor those workers for permanent status if they wish. Status can be verified by applying or reapplying for a drivers license which can be used for gaining employment. No one can work legally who can't prove they should be here.

Any type of public ior fiduciary entity must verify status. Govt, hospitals, financial institutions, etc. Close off the avenues that allow people to exist illegally and many will end up back home voluntarily or otherwise.

In the meantime, create reciprocal immigration agreements. If it's stricter than ours, mirror it. Tie immigration to trade agreements and if they want freer access to our country, we need freer access to theirs, simple as that.

It will not solve the problem overnite, but the next 10 years or so it will. It's the best solution I can think of.

[MACVSOG68]

As we don't have the political will to round them up any more (nor do I necessary want our increasingly statist govt going door to door anyway) I'm all for building a fence, while concurrently enforcing existing law.

With the ones who are here, it's very simple: they get temporary status, and while on it they must have a job (or if they lose it to a layoff, find another within say, 6 to 9 months), no welfare, no convictions above traffic violations.

They get to the back of the line to get some sort of legal status, whether a green card, visa, citizenship, whatever. As long as they're in the process to recieve one of these they are good. If they leave that at any time they're gone.

Employers must verify legal status, anyone who doesn't have it must get a temporary card. They can sponsor those workers for permanent status if they wish. Status can be verified by applying or reapplying for a drivers license which can be used for gaining employment. No one can work legally who can't prove they should be here.

Any type of public ior fiduciary entity must verify status. Govt, hospitals, financial institutions, etc. Close off the avenues that allow people to exist illegally and many will end up back home voluntarily or otherwise.

In the meantime, create reciprocal immigration agreements. If it's stricter than ours, mirror it. Tie immigration to trade agreements and if they want freer access to our country, we need freer access to theirs, simple as that.

It will not solve the problem overnite, but the next 10 years or so it will. It's the best solution I can think of.

Most of that and more was in the 2007 legislation.  The 2013 bill was almost as good.

[Bigun]

I've not missed your point at all...for a very long time.  ^-^

What is your metric for "fixing the border"?  And I agree with your Wimpy line.  No one believes that any effort to improve on border security would ever result in realistic talks about what to do with those already here.  So no, it's why all the issues have to be on the table.

My metric for fixing the border is to bring about the condition whereby we know who is in our country from where their purpose for being here and the length of time they are authorized to stay at all times with mechanisms in place to make sure that they abide by the terms of their visas.

Every country on Earth manages to do that to a far greater extent than we do. Why is that?

Until that is done there is absolutely NO point in talking about anything else!

[MACVSOG68]

My metric for fixing the border is to bring about the condition whereby we know who is in our country from where their purpose for being here and the length of time they are authorized to stay at all times with mechanisms in place to make sure that they abide by the terms of their visas.

Every country on Earth manages to do that to a far greater extent than we do. Why is that?

Until that is done there is absolutely NO point in talking about anything else!

It's a great goal, and with serious discussions and compromises by both sides of the aisle, great strides can be made.  And since, as I've said before, we can walk and chew gum at the same time, we ought to be able to work toward that.  OTOH, if we tell the other side to suck eggs, we will achieve little to nothing.
 
Let me ask you this.  If we could make more progress toward that goal by starting a program of legalization of some type for those already here, wouldn't you agree that would be better than less or no progress?

[Bigun]

It's a great goal, and with serious discussions and compromises by both sides of the aisle, great strides can be made.  And since, as I've said before, we can walk and chew gum at the same time, we ought to be able to work toward that.  OTOH, if we tell the other side to suck eggs, we will achieve little to nothing.
 
Let me ask you this.  If we could make more progress toward that goal by starting a program of legalization of some type for those already here, wouldn't you agree that would be better than less or no progress?

NO! I would not agree!

Not until the border is secure and proven to be so!

Do I look like Charlie Brown?

[MACVSOG68]

NO! I would not agree!

Not until the border is secure and proven to be so!

IOW, even if that goal could be helped with compromise on legalization, we would rather there be no progress if that's what it takes.  Okay. 

[Bigun]

IOW, even if that goal could be helped with compromise on legalization, we would rather there be no progress if that's what it takes.  Okay.

We've been down the road you propose to travel numerous times already and securing the border always seems to get forgotten after your side get's what it wants!

Lucy holding the football for Charlie brown to kick and then pulling it away at the last second isn't going to fly this time!

[Formerly Once-Ler]

NO! I would not agree!

Not until the border is secure and proven to be so!

Do I look like Charlie Brown?

So the right wants to do nothing, and the left wants to do nothing, and we are doing nothing...where is the problem?

[Bigun]

So the right wants to do nothing, and the left wants to do nothing, and we are doing nothing...where is the problem?

Wrong again! I want our borders SECURED! That is not nothing!

[MACVSOG68]

We've been down the road you propose to travel numerous times already and securing the border always seems to get forgotten after your side get's what it wants!

Lucy holding the football for Charlie brown to kick and then pulling it away at the last second isn't going to fly this time!

I'm not sure what you mean by "my side".  I would think securing the border would be on all of our sides.  I should think that those who are willing to look at all options for securing our border might be more concerned about our borders than those who won't.  But that's just me. 

[Bigun]

I'm not sure what you mean by "my side".  I would think securing the border would be on all of our sides.  I should think that those who are willing to look at all options for securing our border might be more concerned about our borders than those who won't.  But that's just me. 

By your side I mean those who want to legalize those already in the country first and then conveniently forget the secure the border part of the agreement. We've seen that movie several times already!

[libertybele]

It's a great goal, and with serious discussions and compromises by both sides of the aisle, great strides can be made.  And since, as I've said before, we can walk and chew gum at the same time, we ought to be able to work toward that.  OTOH, if we tell the other side to suck eggs, we will achieve little to nothing.
 
Let me ask you this.  If we could make more progress toward that goal by starting a program of legalization of some type for those already here, wouldn't you agree that would be better than less or no progress?

Compromises on both sides of the aisle?  No.  #1  A fence needs to be built and our border needs to be secured period.  #2 Our existing immigration laws needs to be enforced period.  #3 ICE and border patrol agents needs to be allowed to do their jobs period.

I don't see starting a program of legalization of "some type" for those already here as progress, I see it as rewarding people for breaking the law.  They are here ILLEGALLY.   Progress would be deporting people for being here illegally with no chance of citizenship.  Those that are already here and voluntarily self-deport would have a chance to apply for citizenship with a 7-10 year waiting period.  However, there would be no guarantee or promise that citizenship will be granted.  Citizenship would be given more consideration to those that have learned English, have knowledge of the Constitution and U.S. history and willing to assimilate to our culture.  Those that have not entered illegally and apply for citizenship would be considered first.

If the the United States were to finally build a fence, secure the border and implement mass deportation along with enforcing existing immigration laws, it wouldn't take long before the word got out that the United States has  zero tolerance for illegal immigration.

[DCPatriot]

Still like the idea of them having to run a gauntlet of sorts.

I mean, even the water buffalo and zebra have to cross that damned river bank filled with crocs.  Every year!

This way, we're guaranteeing a stronger, wiser....and luckier gene pool.

No way Jose, should every Jose get a free ticket just for showing up.   I mean, this isn't organized soccer leagues we're talking about, 'Willis'.

But seriously, build that wall, or checkpoints every 300 feet, staffed with consoles for controlling spy drones.

Turn this tap off.  And fire and/or arrest every damned current person enforcing and conducting policy contrary to our written, established laws.

[libertybele]

Still like the idea of them having to run a gauntlet of sorts.

I mean, even the water buffalo and zebra have to cross that damned river bank filled with crocs.  Every year!

This way, we're guaranteeing a stronger, wiser....and luckier gene pool.

No way Jose, should every Jose get a free ticket just for showing up.   I mean, this isn't organized soccer leagues we're talking about, 'Willis'.

But seriously, build that wall, or checkpoints every 300 feet, staffed with consoles for controlling spy drones.

Turn this tap off.  And fire and/or arrest every damned current person enforcing and conducting policy contrary to our written, established laws.

    

[MACVSOG68]

By your side I mean those who want to legalize those already in the country first and then conveniently forget the secure the border part of the agreement. We've seen that movie several times already!

Well that's your mistake.  I've never even suggested that.  If you've seen that movie more than once, you've been watching reruns.  I've constantly been referring to the 2007 legislation which required many actions related to border security and enforcement before any permanent legalization.  But you knew that.

[Bigun]

Well that's your mistake.  I've never even suggested that.  If you've seen that movie more than once, you've been watching reruns.  I've constantly been referring to the 2007 legislation which required many actions related to border security and enforcement before any permanent legalization.  But you knew that.

Yeah! And all those many other things you mention came AFTER we legalized (granted amnesty to) those already in the country!

NO! Thank you!

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Still like the idea of them having to run a gauntlet of sorts.

I mean, even the water buffalo and zebra have to cross that damned river bank filled with crocs.  Every year!

This way, we're guaranteeing a stronger, wiser....and luckier gene pool.

No way Jose, should every Jose get a free ticket just for showing up.   I mean, this isn't organized soccer leagues we're talking about, 'Willis'.

But seriously, build that wall, or checkpoints every 300 feet, staffed with consoles for controlling spy drones.

Turn this tap off.  And fire and/or arrest every damned current person enforcing and conducting policy contrary to our written, established laws.

Obama says no.  His surrogates are enforcing the law.  Do you propose to secure the border before a new President is sworn in?  I don't think that will happen because of the spinelessness of the GOPe, or reality, or something.

Now lets us dream a new President wants to build a real barrier to keep out the invading hoard.  Remember if it's a real barrier it will keep us in "land of the free" too.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/systems/mexico-wall.htm

US-Mexico Border Fence / Great Wall of Mexico
Secure Fence

The US and Mexico share a common border of about 2,000-miles (3,200-km). As of February 10, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security had completed 651 miles of fencing out of nearly 652 miles mandated by Congress, including 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 352 miles of pedestrian fence.

Pedestrian Fence


Vehicle Fence

So pretty.  Already built a lot of it.



There is about 2,000 miles of border between the United States and Mexico.
In 2005 we had about 80 miles of fencing.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, authorized the building of a fence.

As of February 10, 2012, the Department had completed 651 miles of fencing out of nearly 652 miles mandated by Congress, including 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 352 miles of pedestrian fence. The precise location and type of fencing used was developed by examining unique characteristics of the terrain and gathering feedback and intelligence from Border Patrol chiefs with responsibility over the nine Southern border sectors.

A new law needs to authorize more fencing.  And Obama gets to VETO it until 2017.

Maybe we should started building a fence up north and start securing the coasts as long as we are soo freaking rich.