OBAMA: I have been a consistent champion of comprehensive immigration reform. And keep in mind that my father came to this country from a small village in Africa because he was looking for opportunity. And so when I see people who are coming across these borders, whether legally or illegally, I know that the motivation is trying to create a better life for their children and their grandchildren. So I was one of the leaders, along with several other senators, in passing comprehensive immigration reform. It failed in the House. That is going to involve some elements of border security because we’ve got to make our borders more secure. We can’t just have hundreds of thousands of people coming into the country without knowing who they are.
Source: Obama-Romney interviews by Univision Noticias (Spanish News) Sep 19, 2012
A: There's the thinking that the President is somebody who is all powerful and can get everything done. In our system of government, I am the head of the executive branch. I'm not the head of the legislature; I'm not the head of the judiciary. We have to have cooperation from all these sources in order to get something done. And so I take responsibility for the fact that we didn't get it done, but I did not make a promise that I would get everything done, 100%, when I was elected. What is relevant is that I have never wavered in my support of comprehensive immigration reform. We did put forward a DREAM Act that was passed in the House, got the overwhelming majority of support from Democrats in the Senate, and was blocked by the Republican Party. We now are confronted with a choice between two candidates in which I am committed to the DREAM Act, and [Romney] said he would veto the DREAM Act.
A: We focus our enforcement on people who genuinely pose a threat to our communities, not to hardworking families who are minding their own business and oftentimes have members of their family who are US citizens. We don't have the capacity to enforce across the board. So more than half of our enforcement now is directed at people with criminal records. Of the remaining half, about 2/3 are people who are apprehended close to the border, so these are not people who have longstanding roots in our community. And what we've tried to do then is focus our attention on real threats, and make sure that families are not the targets.
A: Yes, I would do it my first year. I want everybody to look at the Statue of Liberty. This symbolizes freedom, diversity, and that we’re a nation of immigrants. This is what we need to do in immigration my first year.
A: Yes, I would, because it shows that a dysfunctional relationship between the Congress and the president caused the breakdown of a potential compromise. Now we have to wait till 2008 and 2009, and these raids are ineffective, they’re a symbol of what’s wrong with a broken immigration policy. I also object to the fact of dehumanizing immigrants. You know, when the media pictures them crossing the border, swimming across a river, doing something like jumping a fence--why don’t they depict the Latinos that today are fighting for America in Iraq and are dying for this country, or the Congressional Medal of Honor winners? And I object to the dehumanizing of people that are part and that want to be part of an American dream.
A: Certainly [we should be] promoting greater understanding in language in this country. It’s a source of some collective embarrassment that we Americans don’t speak enough languages, that we always think the rest of the world has to understand English. I’m proud of the fact that [I speak Spanish]. I understand that we need to encourage more language training in the country. [However], I believe that the common language of our country is English, but that we ought to encourage and support those who are not English speakers to be able to enjoy the benefits and opportunities of these country.
A: Obviously, any debate about immigration has to include security here. The American people feel strongly about it. But I would argue that while there may be a place periodically to have security along that border that include some fence, it’s also important that we understand the underlying reason why people emigrate, and we’re not focusing enough attention on that. We need to be dealing with our neighbor, Mexico, far more cooperatively. For 26 years, I’ve co-chaired the interparliamentary meeting with Mexico. This is an ally, this is a friend, this is a neighbor. We need to have trading agreements and economic agreements that can lift people up, with working conditions that would allow them to live in their countries not have to emigrate to this country.
A: Yes. When I was mayor of Cleveland, I made it a point to reach out to our Hispanic community in the city of Cleveland. And before that, 40 years ago, when I was a candidate for city council, it was the involvement in the Hispanic community that proved to create the circumstances for my election. So I have a deep understanding of the economic issues that people deal with.
A: First of all, a Kucinich administration will build relationships between nations, not walls. We need to move forward with an America that remembers where we came from, and immigration reform has to be central to it. That means there must be a path to legalization, because there are no illegal human beings. We have to start looking at our policies, which are aimed at separating people. Everyone here understands that the immigration acceleration occurred after the passage of NAFTA. I’ve said one of my first acts in office will be to cancel NAFTA and the WTO and go back to trade based on workers’ rights. And then we have a new trade agreement with Mexico, a trade agreement that strengthens America and Mexico and strengthens the rights of workers to organize and collectively bargain.
A: I represent a district in San Diego that for many, many years is a majority Hispanic and two-to-one Democrat. You know what you do? You look people in the eye and you talk to them frankly. I would say this: I got more votes from the Hispanic community--known as the guy who built the border fence--than anybody running for office. That means that the Hispanic community in the United States does not agree with the idea of having open borders. They do agree with the idea of having order on the border and having a regulated system where this lady of freedom standing behind me, the Statue of Liberty, says: Come in, but follow the rules.
A: Because we have to enforce our borders, and we have to uphold the law. There are millions of people who have stood in line in US embassies around the world, waiting to become American citizens, waiting to become legal residents of the US. But when they finally come here, and when they are joined by those people in Latin America who have often fought tyranny, who have fought against the Castro regime, who have come here and risked their lives to become US citizens, when all those people come here, they become a part of us; they become a part of our family. It would disrespect them if we said other people who had not obeyed the law and had not gone through the process, to set them above them and to give them special status above those who have obeyed the law and fought so hard to become good American citizens and legal residents.
A: Our courts have ruled that such babies born here are US citizens. That's part of the 14th Amendment as has been interpreted by the courts. I believe that the concentration should not be on the concern of waiting until that child grows up and serves as an anchor baby, as we hear so much talk about. I believe the concern should be chain migration. Right now, we have a situation where people can bring in spouses, children, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers and so forth. I think that people should be able to serve as a basis for the bringing in of their spouses and of their children, but I do not think there should be endless chain migration. So I think that is the issue to focus on, and not innocent children who are born here not of their own accord and who our courts have said our US citizens.
A: I do favor much more border patrolling and much more technology on both of our borders, and in certain areas, even a physical barrier, because I think we've got to secure our borders. That has to be part of comprehensive immigration reform. I have championed comprehensive immigration reform, and it includes starting with securing our borders in order to give people the support they need to come over and support us when it comes to having a pathway to legalization. We all know that this has become a contentious political issue. We want to work in a bipartisan way to have comprehensive reform--employer verification, more help for local communities so that they can pay for schooling and hospital and other expenses that they have to bear because of the immigration crisis.
A: Absolutely. And I think there are three different aspects of this.
A: There are many in the political and the broadcast world today who take a particular aim at our Latino population. And I think it's very destructive. It undermines our unity as a country. There was a particularly egregious example of that in the House-passed bill last year. The House bill tried to criminalize anyone who helped an illegal immigrant, anyone who gave them medical care, any church that opened up to give them food at a dinner or breakfast. And I said that it would have criminalized the Good Samaritan. It would have criminalized Jesus Christ. We have to say no, we are a nation of immigrants, and we will respect and treat one another with dignity.
A: The answer's yes, I would commit to do it, not just in my first year, but at the beginning of the Edwards administration. I think the president has a responsibility to do something about this hugely important issue. You know, when you walk into a Blockbuster to rent a movie, you don't see anybody, but you hear a voice saying, "Welcome to Blockbuster." We can figure out when somebody's walking into a Blockbuster. It seems to me we can figure out when somebody's coming into the US, and especially if we use the technology that's available to us. And I think that's what the focus should be on: more Border Patrol, better use of technology, & absolutely a path to earn citizenship for those who are living here & who are undocumented. But we also have to get at the underlying causes of the migration from Mexico, which means addressing the issue of poverty, education, health, the reason that so many are coming to the US.
A: We should be proud of the fact that we've had so many workers come into this country who deserve a path to earn citizenship & who are working to support their families. They have made America richer, culturally more diverse, & they are performing jobs that, in some cases, would be difficult to find others to perform. They're an important part of our economy. We need to not just recognize the economic benefits of these workers, but understand in many cases they are being abused, they are being taken advantage of, their rights are not being protected. And it is enormously important that we have comprehensive immigration reform so that those who in fact are working 10 hours a day in 105-degree heat have the same sort of worker rights that other Americans have. They are no less human, and no less value as human beings, and they deserve those same rights.
A: I think the most practical value is to make English used by all Americans and all citizens, and all who come here. The only way we move up the economic ladder from the bottom rung is to know English. And I would emphasize the importance of every person who comes to this country to become a citizen and enjoy its liberties & beauty is to learn English. And I will do everything I can to help them do that.
A: Immediately. But secondly, I think we need to understand that the whole national immigration issue is national scapegoating. It's national scapegoating because we have our failures in education, we have failures in health care, every place you turn our society is crumbling around us. And so we want to find somebody to scapegoat, blame it on them.
A: Totally. I think it's abominable that they go out and do these raids, and separate families. Stop and think--all these people want to do is earn enough money to feed their families, whether they send them money back home or they bring their families here. If we made it easier for them to go back and forth on the borders, you wouldn't have this problem.
A: It is a great opportunity. But I do want to take my time to give my condolences to the Soriano family. Armando Soriano was recently killed in Iraq, and his father is about to be deported. I think there's something basically wrong with that situation.
Let me point out, I'm first-generation American. My parents came here like many of your parents, and I spoke French before I could speak English as a child. My dad was very humble, didn't have a third-grade education, but he was able to work and prosper in this country, and so I honor anybody that comes to this country as an immigrant, because we're all immigrants. There's been nobody else but the Indians in this great land.
A: The first step is a secure border, because otherwise nothing really matters. But I do think the pathway has to include people going to the back, not the front of the line. There can't be an amnesty policy, because that's an insult to all the people who waited, sometimes, ridiculously, for years, just to be able to make the transition here. If you can get an American Express card in two weeks, it shouldn't take seven years to get a work permit to come to this country in order to work on a farm. So if our government is incapable of making that process in that length of time, then we should do it in a way to outsource it. And here's why: When people come to this country, they shouldn't fear. They shouldn't live in hiding. They ought to have their heads up, because we believe every person ought to have his or her head up and proud.
A: You know, I have the occasion to talk to people who have loved ones that are hoping to come to this country, to be reunited with family members. And they're staying in their home countries applying legally. I believe that those people ought to be the first ones to get to come to this country. Those who have come illegally, in my view, should be given the opportunity to get in line with everybody else, but there should be no special pathway for those that have come here illegally to jump ahead of the line or to be come permanent residents or citizens. They should be treated like everybody else who wants to come to this country. We're going to protect legal immigration. At the same time, we're going to enforce the law, show that we're a nation of laws, and welcome the people who have been standing in line first.
A: You know, we're a very compassionate people. We're also a people who follow the law. And the landscaper at my home is an old friend, and when he made a mistake the first time, I told him in no uncertain terms, you have to make sure that anybody that works on my property is legal. And he did his best, but he made a mistake. And apparently, two people he had there were not legal. And we terminated that relationship. And that became a big news story. But employers like this landscape company, and he's Hispanic American, he doesn't have a way to determine whether the people he's hiring are legal or illegal. That's why we need an employment verification system to identify the fact that legal aliens that come here are legal, are entitled to work.
A: The Constitution indicates that those that are born here do become US citizens by virtue of being born here. But if they're born here from parents who come across the border illegally and bring them here illegally, in my view, we should not adopt, then, these chain migration policies that say, you've got a child here that's a US citizen, and the whole family can come in. That, in my opinion, is a mistake. We are a nation of laws. We're going to enforce the laws. We're not going to cut off immigration; we're going to keep immigration alive and thriving. But we're going to end the practice of illegal immigration. It's not inhumane. It's humanitarian. It's compassionate. We're going to end illegal immigration to protect legal immigration.
A: Let me respond more broadly and then get to the specific of young people who were brought here through no fault of their own, and are now going to school here. The immigration system, I think we all agree, is broken and it's been a political football for years and years. It needs to be fixed. Also, instead of having our diversity visas offered, we provide instead the chance to pull families together. I want that to be the favored system for immigration. I also believe that we should have temporary work visas consistent with the needs of the employment community and by the way, if the student does so well that they get an advanced degree, I'd staple the green card to their diploma. For those young people who, for instance, serve in our military, that they should be able to become a permanent resident.
A: My view is that we should put in a place a permanent solution. What the president did was take no action; he put in place something he called a stop-gap measure. Temporary. These kids deserve something better than temporary. They deserve a permanent solution.
Q: But, with all due respect, you are reluctant to provide details on a permanent solution? Are you going to deport the DREAMers or not?
A: Well, we're not going to round up people and deport them. That includes the kids and the parents. I would be in support of a program that said the people who serve in our military could be permanent residents. Marco Rubio's "Dream and Achieve Act" had a number of features that said kids that get higher education could become permanent residents. I will solve it on a permanent basis consistent with those principles.
Q: So you're going to allow them to stay?
A: I'm not going to be rounding people up and deporting them.
A: I believe people make their own choices as to whether they want to go home & that's what I mean by self-deportation. People decide if they want to go back to the country of their origin and get in line legally to be able to come to this country. Look, legal immigration is critical for America. I love legal immigration. But at the same time, to protect legal immigration we have to secure our borders and what I like about the Arizona law was the employment verification system.
Q: Should the whole country follow Arizona's immigration laws?
A: The reason there's an Arizona law is because the federal government, and specifically, Pres. Obama didn't solve immigration problem when he came into office. The right answer is ultimately to have a federal solution; [then] we don't have to have states trying to find solutions of their own.
A: Well, it's practical because we can all understand each other. I sometimes think that those who attack bilingualism sometimes are jealous, & we feel inferior, because we're not capable. But we should have one language. But we, as federal officials, as a congressman or a president, we only have authority over the federal government. So I think all federal things should be in English. But when it comes to bilingualism in schools or the states, under our Constitution, it really is permissible. And the states can decide that. But under the conditions that we have today, I think it is good and proper to have one language, which would be English, for all legal matters at the national level. But this doesn't preclude bilingualism in private use or in education or in local government.
A: The first thing that has to be done is we have to end illegal immigration. If we don't end illegal immigration, we're really going to risk legal immigration. We should end illegal immigration at the border, because it can't be really dealt with internally. We should do it by having a fence, a technological fence, as well as a physical fence. It should be used to alert the Border Patrol of the people coming to the border, and we should stop people from coming in. Then we should have a tamper-proof ID card that everybody can get who wants to come into the US legally. When we accomplish that, when we have control of our borders, when we preserve the legality of immigration, we can then turn to the people that are here. The people that come forward can sign up. They can pay taxes, and then the people who don't, those people should be expelled from the US if they don't already leave.
A: There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant--there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants--not only economically is that just an impossibility but that's not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue.
Q: Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 million undocumented immigrants?
A: No, I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. We have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.
Q: So you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?
A: I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.
| |||
| 2024 Presidential contenders on Immigration: | |||
|
Candidates for President & Vice-President:
V.P.Kamala Harris (D-CA) Robert F. Kennedy Jr.(I-CA) Chase Oliver(L-GA) Dr.Jill Stein(D-MA) Former Pres.Donald Trump(R-FL) Sen.J.D.Vance(R-OH) Gov.Tim Walz(D-MN) Dr.Cornel West(I-NJ) |
2024 presidential primary contenders:
Pres.Joe_Biden(D-DE) N.D.Gov.Doug Burgum(R) N.J.Gov.Chris_Christie(R) Fla.Gov.Ron_DeSantis(R) S.C.Gov.Nikki_Haley(R) Ark.Gov.Asa_Hutchinson(R) Former V.P.Mike Pence(R-IN) U.S.Rep.Dean_Phillips(D-MN) Vivek_Ramaswamy(R-OH) S.C.Sen.Tim_Scott(R) | ||
|
Please consider a donation to OnTheIssues.org!
Click for details -- or send donations to: 1770 Mass Ave. #630, Cambridge MA 02140 E-mail: submit@OnTheIssues.org (We rely on your support!) | |||