Tancredo vs. Ron Paul on Illegal Immigration

[Lord Xar]

I want to know the real deal here.

I went to Tancredos website and it mentioned a NUMBER of instances in which Ron Paul voted for amnesty and illegal immigrant rights.. YET, Ron Paul sounds as if he is against Illegal Immigrants and such.

Personally, my whole agenda those of my family and friends is someone who is VERY STRONG ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Where does Ron Paul really stand?

I know what I read (on his website), but Tancredo and others have shown instances in the past in which Mr. Paul's voting record on illegal immigration is not matching his stance now.

Please advise.. otherwise I dig Ron Paul.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Someone posted this earlier, elsewhere on this board:

Ron Paul will be the guest on the Terry Anderson show tonight at 9 p.m. pacific, 11 central. If you don't live out west and get KRLA in L.A. or KDWN in Vegas or KFNX in Phoenix you can listen live at www.theterryandersonshow.com

Also, if you miss the live show, an archived version will be available by Monday morning at the website.

The topic will be illegal immigration.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Dr. Paul opposes amnesty and has said so repeatedly that we shouldn't promote illegal behavior--when we do (as we did in 1986), we should expect to see more of it.

I am not familiar with the votes or sites you refer to but don't include. Given how rarely Dr. Paul actually votes "aye" on, well, anything, I would surmise that Dr. Paul voted against a bill for a combination of reasons where a part of that bill could have included positions misinterpreted that way.

 

[LibertyCzar]

Tancredo has some interesting ideas. And his approach to this presidential campaign is fascinating. He doesn't believe he'll win. But he wants to force what he calls a "broker" Republican Convention. This means that no one will have the necessary delegates to win the nomination. It'll be like the Iowa Caucus, where the delegates for different candidates will bargain. With the way things are shaping out, this could very well happen. I'm certain Mitt Romney will get many delegates. So will Fred Thompson, unless he doesn't run. I even think Huckabee could get some delegates. McCain, I think will be gone before any primary, so he won't get any. But Giuliani will get some of the progressive Republican delegates. Duncan Hunter should win the delegates from his own District, at least. It'll be crazy. I really think this will be a "broker" convention. The same, I think will happen to the Democrats, but that's another matter.

This is where Ron Paul can really influence the Republican Party, even if he ends up not getting the nomination. The delegates he gets can force some sort of compromise. And I'm sure Ron Paul will get more delegates than Tom Tancredo. Then Ron Paul could run on as a Third Party candidate. It's wonderful.

 

[Lord Xar]

How about a

Tancredo/Paul TICKET...

PUSH THAT ANGLE !!!!!

 

[angrydragon]

Does Tom provide any evidence of the votes? What bills he's referring to?

 

[JoshLowry]

I went to Tancredos website and it mentioned a NUMBER of instances in which Ron Paul voted for amnesty and illegal immigrant rights..

Can you please provide a link? Hard to answer your question if it's going to be that vague...

 

[LibertyEagle]

Xar,

Tancredo is good on immigration and I do like the man, but Dr. Paul is much stronger than he on the issues of our economy, foreign policy, trade, monetary policy, etc.

 

[JoshLowry]

Lord Xar you also might want to read this thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=1853

 

[Bradley in DC]

As I explained in an earlier post on another thread, Dr. Paul's endorsement and Liberty PAC got Tancredo the Republican nomination in a crowded primary that got him elected. Tancredo then joined Dr. Paul's Congressional Liberty Caucus, and Dr. Paul has returned the favor joining Tancredo's immigration one. They are personal friends and very close philosphically, and the two are closest among the presidential candidates.

Rep. Tancredo has announced publicly previously that he would announce his decision this month whether to run for re-election to the House or continue his presidential run (unlike Dr. Paul who is taking advantage of Texas' LBJ law to run for both). I expect him to keep his safe seat and endorse Dr. Paul later in the year. Any Paul-Tancredo rivalry is misplaced.

With respect to the immigration question, Dr. Paul is more interested in addressing the causes not the symptoms but both agree with both.

 

[LibertyCzar]

Tancredo is more of a one-trick pony. He'll be good in the House. Ron Paul will need friends in Congress. It's not enough for him to be President if Congress will be entirely hostile toward all his positions. I could easily see Tancredo endorsing Ron Paul at some point, if he drops out. Or he could go into the convention, and then tell his delegates to go to Ron Paul. That would be good too.

 

[Wyurm]

this is a bill Dr. Paul voted yes on: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/house/2/votes/446/

 

[angelatc]

http://profiles.numbersusa.com/improfile.php3?DistSend=TX&VIPID=787 - shows immigration-related votes.

Also, this is a comment from an immigration control forum I occasionally peruse:

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=69951

Voted on House floor against amendment to increase security with border fence in 2005
Rep. Paul voted against the Hunter Amendment to H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. The Hunter Amendment would shore up security by building fences and other physical infrastructure to keep out illegal aliens. Specifically, it mandates the construction of specific security fencing, including lights and cameras, along the Southwest border for the purposes of gaining operational control of the border. As well, it includes a requirement for the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on the use of physical barriers along the Northern border. The Hunter Amendment passed by a vote of 260-159.

 

[mesler]

One of the biggest differences between Tancredo and Paul is Tancredo apparently wants to stop legal immigration (temporarily) as well.

This is Paul's entry at www.ontheissues.org:

* Keep rule barring immigrants from running for president. (May 2007)
* Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border. (Sep 2006)
* Voted YES on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project. (Jun 2006)
* Voted YES on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment. (May 2004)
* Voted YES on extending Immigrant Residency rules. (May 2001)
* Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers. (Sep 1998)
* Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration. (Dec 2003)

Tancredo has a very good reason to make Paul look soft on immigration, as it's pretty much his only issue. For Paul, it's a side issue, but he is 2nd behind Tancredo, from what I can tell, on what he wants to do to fix the problem.

 

[angelatc]

I've read several places that Tancredo and Paul are friends, so I don't imagine things will get nasty unless it comes down to the two of them being the only finalists on Super Tuesday.

 

[Bradley in DC]

http://profiles.numbersusa.com/improfile.php3?DistSend=TX&VIPID=787 - shows immigration-related votes.

Also, this is a comment from an immigration control forum I occasionally peruse:

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=69951

What else was in the amendment?! Did Dr. Paul make a statement on the Floor or release to the press?

 

[Daveforliberty]

Tancredo (or more likely a staffer) isn't telling the whole story about Ron Paul's votes. Although technically he did vote for or against certain bills that were championed by one side or the other in the immigration debate, it appears he did so on (surprise surprise) constitutional grounds.

I don't know the details about his votes, but I see several where he voted against putting US troops on the border (the Founding Fathers would have been in unanimous agreement), and against the Real ID act. A yes vote on Real ID would built Giuliani's database, and yes would have some impact on illegal immigration, but would also have been a fast track to a National ID card.

Looks like Dr. Pauls votes on immigration, like everything else in his record, is constistent and in line with the constitution.

 

[LibertyCzar]

Tancredo is trying to look like the purist when it comes to illegal immigration. I guess that's fine. That's his issue. But will he be a good administrator, delegator, leader? That's another matter. I'd rather have him in Congress. Ron Paul seems to have what it takes. He inspires people to follow.

 

[lynnf]

points to consider

I want to know the real deal here.

I went to Tancredos website and it mentioned a NUMBER of instances in which Ron Paul voted for amnesty and illegal immigrant rights.. YET, Ron Paul sounds as if he is against Illegal Immigrants and such.

Personally, my whole agenda those of my family and friends is someone who is VERY STRONG ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Where does Ron Paul really stand?

I know what I read (on his website), but Tancredo and others have shown instances in the past in which Mr. Paul's voting record on illegal immigration is not matching his stance now.

Please advise.. otherwise I dig Ron Paul.

It is important to consider not only what was in the legislation that was voted on, but when the vote occurred. I have no knowledge of the specific votes involved,
but it is only common sense and experience that tells me that it should be investigated further.

The major reason that when the vote occurred is important is that we have a past
involving immigration - most of us are descended from immigrants. However, it is only in recent years that illegal immigration has been proven to be so damaging to the country. So Ron Paul might be excused for earlier votes that might have favored immigration. In recent years it has become apparent that corporations have hired illegal aliens and encouraged them to apply for welfare benefits to provide health benefits at the expense of the taxpayers rather than providing benefits to them themselves.

Not to mention that the number of illegal aliens is purposely low-balled by saying
it is only 12 million when a more realistic estimate is 30-40 million! And then there is the lie that they only take jobs that Americans don't want. Much of this misinformation has only been exposed in more recent years.

So I would urge you to consider these things when making your decision about our candidate - and consider them carefully.

lynn

 

[Bradley in DC]

It is important to consider not only what was in the legislation that was voted on, but when the vote occurred. I have no knowledge of the specific votes involved,
but it is only common sense and experience that tells me that it should be investigated further.

Dr. Paul's positions have not and do not change. Obviously, when voting aye or nay on a bill, it depends on what's in the whole bill (different versions of which change over time).