Which candidate (if any) is committed to true immigration reform

Since 10-14-06

From: Roy Beck NumbersUSA [mailto:immigrationinfo@numbersusa.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 9:12 PM
Subject: UPDATE: fence, elections, a death in our office

Marilyn C., Washington State

Marilyn is referring to an Alert I sent last month stating that no candidate's success is probably more important symbolically than that of Randy Graf the Republican nominee for congressman from Tucson, Arizona, because of his absolute firmness on border security issues and his opponent's preference for an amnesty -- and the fact that the national news media states that you can't win on the border if you stand for really tough immigration laws.

Now, most of you should remember that I am a life-long political Independent -- and that we have both Democrats and Republicans on our staff -- and that we are equal-opportunity praisers and critics, sticking to immigration issues.

The problem during this election campaign is that in most races the candidate with the better (usually far better) record on immigration is the Republican (or sometimes a Libertarian).

On the other hand, there are some really bad Republican incumbents (on immigration). And we are pleased to see that most Democrats who are in competitive districts are campaigning on being tough on border security issues.

We don't actually endorse candidates, because we respect that you will vote based on a whole list of criteria including character and many issues. We wouldn't presume to know who the best candidate for you might be.

But we DO tell you which candidate (if any) is committed to true immigration reform.

You can find all kinds of helpful information on the best immigration-reduction candidates at:

http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/featuredraces.html

It is not too late to try to press candidates to take our survey and get themselves on record about what they would do on various key immigration issues if they win this election. (Find the survey with the above link.)

Now is the time they are paying attention and when you can have the most influence on them.

You can go to each candidate's webpage by clicking on the names of candidates on our pages.

I am including a recent news story about Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) because it shows that even an entrenched politician like him can find himself on the hot seat over immigration.

Nobody has worked harder or longer than Sen. Kennedy to flood American occupations and communities with foreign workers and their dependents. It is nice to see that Kenneth Chase is a candidate who can put Sen. Kennedy on the defensive like that.

We are getting strong appeals from our members in Massachusetts to let others around the nation know that Kenneth Chase has a remote chance because of the immigration issue.

Compare the candidates at:

http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/cand06_masen.html

You can learn how to help their campaigns at:

Chase: http://www.chaseforsenate.com/

Kennedy: http://tedkennedy.com/


Senator on defensive during most of event

By Lisa Wangsness
Boston Globe

October 11, 2006

(excerpts)

In his first and only scheduled debate with US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Republican challenger Kenneth G. Chase focused relentlessly yesterday on two topics: energy independence and illegal immigration.

Chase, who lives in Belmont, repeatedly accused Kennedy of failing to develop a sound alternative energy policy during his 44 years in the Senate. Chase said Kennedy's immigration bill was nothing but ``a clarion call" to hundreds of millions of Mexicans, Chinese, Indians, and others determined ``to break in" to the country.

Kennedy often found himself on the defensive. But, as a popular incumbent who has not had a serious challenge in 12 years, Kennedy struck the tone of a battle-worn realist.

He said there was little he could do to fundamentally change America's energy policy, because ``this administration is owned lock, stock and barrel by the oil companies." He said his immigration bill did not offer amnesty to illegal immigrants, but rather a realistic compromise to address a difficult problem.....

....When Curtis (the debate moderator) changed the subject to domestic policy, asking Chase about No Child Left Behind, the sweeping 2002 education bill that Kennedy cosponsored, Chase seized the opportunity to change the subject himself, to illegal immigration.

Chase -- who recently spent most of a week on the Arizona border with Mexico with the Minutemen, a civilian border patrol corps -- said that illegal immigration is the greatest problem facing American education.

``A whole lot of children are left behind, Chet, in the real world, in a classroom when you've got 10 to 18 percent of a given classroom population that has limited or no proficiency in the English language," he said. ``The class lesson of that particular day comes to a screeching halt."

When it was his turn to speak, Kennedy said No Child Left Behind needed more funding, but so did other aspects of education, such as early learning and college loan programs.

But Chase kept pressing on the immigration bill, saying it was nothing short of ``amnesty, because you're giving the illegal immigrants exactly what they want, which is the right to come here and work and not suffer any of the consequences."

In May, the Senate approved legislation sponsored by Kennedy and US Senator John S. McCain III, Republican of Arizona, that would strengthen border security, establish a guest worker program and provide the means for millions of undocumented immigrants to stay in the country. But the bill has languished, and Congress has voted to extend a fence along the Mexican border.

Kennedy defended the bill. ``We're not saying they're forgiven," he said of the immigrants who would have a chance at citizenship. ``They pay a penalty."