Francine Busby (D) running even with Brian Bilbray (R) in special election

Survey USA ^ | May 11, 2006

[Clintonfatigued]

Latest poll has Busby, Bilbray tied at 45% each in race to succeed ex-Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham.

[Clintonfatigued]

Conservatives shouldn't panic just yet. There's time to turn this around.

If Busby actually wins, then is the time to panic.

[LS]

Actually, this is good news. Bilbray was slightly behind.

However, here is an example of a "seal-the-borders" guy not doing very well, despite the views here on FR that illegals is THE issue.

(And I sympathize, I'm a seal-the-borders guy: but I don't see it translating yet into election results.)

[HitmanLV]

I'm not panicking no matter what.

If the GOP loses the House they can probably kiss it goodbye for quite a while. I get a kick out of the 'let's clean the House of the rotten GOPers, let the dems take control, and come back strong' crew. I once asked a Freeper (who's handle escapes me) who had this master plan - lose the House in order to win it back - for an example of when it had ever worked.

Stumped him.

If the GOP loses the house by a decent margin, the GOP isn't in any position to retake it, all else being equal.

[John Geyer]

Why should conservatives even care?

[p. henry]

You're right. If a Democrat wins the 50th, it is a VERY bad sign for Republican prospects in the fall.

[Clintonfatigued]

Because it could have national repercussions. It could cause a fundraising surge for Democrat Congressional candidates elsewhere.

[Names Ash Housewares]

Need to keep in mind that Cunningham put a big stink on republicans in this district. This isnt a normal election by any means.

[John Geyer]

Yes, but I don't care, they pushed Roach out and I feel vengful. I can't vote in this seat, but I'm very angry at the GOP. The GOP supports too many moderates, so I won't support the GOP. I support the Club for Growth who supported Roach.

[Clintonfatigued]

Good point, but a GOP loss in this district will garner a lot of coverage from the Lamestream Media, which could start a domino effect.

[SoCalPol]

Here are a few of the bills Bilbray supported dealing with the border and the illegals when he was in congress in the 1990s.
He was out there early on this issue and is a close the border guy big time.
This is the issue that counts and he is the only republican who can win.
If you vote against him, you are supporting open borders and the illegals.




Co-sponsored bill to stop giving
U.S. citizenship to more than 200,000
‘anchor babies’ of illegal aliens each year 1999-2000.
Rep. Bilbray took a stand against one of the largest sources of U.S. population growth and against one of the strongest incentives for illegal immigration by co-sponsoring H.R.73 (the Bilbray Bill). As a matter of policy for decades, the federal government has granted citizenship to babies born to illegal-alien mothers. This is a pronounced reward to their mothers for having entered or stayed in the United States in violation of immigration laws. Not only do the mothers immediately get access to a whole array of social services for their babies, but these illegal aliens get a virtual guarantee that they will never be asked to leave the country. These babies of illegal aliens are called “anchor babies” because they act as an anchor to eventually pull large extended families into the United States. Rep. Bilbray wants to put an end to this enticement for citizens of other nations to become illegal aliens in this country. H.R.73 would have denied citizenship to babies of women who at the time of giving birth are in the U.S. as illegal aliens, tourists, temporary foreign workers, foreign students and diplomats. The only exception is if the mother is married to the father of the baby, and the father is a U.S. citizen or lawfully admitted permanent resident alien. This will reduce legal U.S. population growth considerably. A California study in 1992 found 96,000 new citizens were added in that year in that state alone through these ‘anchor babies’ of illegal aliens. U.S. Census data on the birthrates of the foreign born indicate that well over 200,000 new citizens are added to the U.S. each year through anchor babies. See detailed description.

---

Co-sponsored legislation to stop rewarding children
of illegal aliens with citizenship 1997-1998.
Rep. Bilbray co-sponsored H.R. 7, the Citizenship Reform Act of 1997 that would have put an end to the automatic granting of citizenship to babies born to illegal aliens in the United States. This policy grants citizenship to some 200,000 additional people a year according to U.S. Census data. Not only do these births represent additional U.S. population growth, but because the babies of illegal aliens are U.S. citizens, they can then act as 'anchors' to eventually pull a large number of extended family members into the country legally.

---

Co-sponsored bill to deny citizenship
to ’anchor babies’ of illegal aliens 1995-1996.
In the 104th Congress, Rep. Bilbray joined 44 other Representatives in co-sponsoring H.R.1363 (the Bilbray Bill) to halt the automatic granting of U.S. citizenship to babies born to illegal-alien mothers in the United States. The House leadership did not bring the bill to a vote.



Voted in 2000 to authorize troops on the border.

Rep. Bilbray acted to enforce the border by voting for the Traficant amendment to H.R.4205. This amendment authorizes the Secretary of Defense, under certain circumstances, to assign members of the Armed Forces to assist the INS with border control duties. The Traficant amendment passed by a vote of 243 to 183, but the Clinton Administration never chose to exercise this power.

---

Signed a letter to Speaker Hastert opposing an illegal alien amnesty in 2000.

Rep. Bilbray, along with 52 other Republican Representatives took a stand against illegal immigration by signing a Dear Colleague letter from Representative Tom Tancredo to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. The letter expressed opposition to an illegal alien amnesty for more than 2 million illegal aliens in an end-of-session appropriations bill. This show of opposition was an important ingredient in the Speaker taking a firm stand against Pres. Clinton's amnesty and in the ultimate defeat of the proposed amnesty.

---

Voted to authorize the use of troops on the border in 1999
Rep. Bilbray voted in favor of the Traficant amendment to H.R. 1401. This amendment authorized the Secretary of Defense, under certain circumstances, to assign members of the Armed Forces to assist the Border Patrol and Customs Service only in drug interdiction and counter terrorism activities along our borders. The Traficant amendment passed by a vote of 242 to 181.

---

Voted to crack down on
illegal immigration in 1996
Rep. Bilbray was part of a 333-87 majority which passed H.R.2202. It was a large omnibus bill with dozens of provisions aimed at reducing illegal immigration. It authorized major increases in the border patrol forces. But it also had many provisions aimed at making life more miserable for illegal aliens who manage to get into the country, half of whom arrive with legal visas but then illegally overstay. Until passage of the bill, a person could be apprehended as an illegal alien, be deported and then turn around and come back to the U.S. on a legal student, tourist, worker or relative visa. After the bill, an illegal alien was barred from any kind of legal entry for 10 years.

---

Tried to create mandatory workplace verification programs in 1996
Rep. Bilbray was one of only 86 Representatives who took the tougher-on-illegal-immigration side during the voting on the Gallegly Amendment to H.R.2202. He voted IN FAVOR of the amendment which would have made pilot workplace verification programs (see above) mandatory in five of the top seven immigration states. The amendment failed 86-331 under complaints that businesses and states should have more choice in whether they participated in workplace programs to keep illegal aliens from taking jobs.

[Wolfstar]

Why should conservatives even care?

Genuine conservatives would care because their goal is to preserve -- conserve -- the Republic. No matter how disenchanted they are with Republicans, genuine conservatives would recognize that the Left is totally anathema to anything conservative.

[John Geyer]

I'd actually be supporting him in the special election if the GOP didn't push out Roach, but now I'm alienated, and angry.

[Wolfstar]

I'd actually be supporting him in the special election if the GOP didn't push out Roach, but now I'm alienated, and angry.

Cry me a river. So wittle Johnnie boy's fweeings were hurt. Poor baby. In the meantime you're willing to send one of the same Marxist tyrants who infest Sacramento to the U.S. House. Some "conservative" you are.

[LS]

Get over it. We have a guy who believes in sealing the border. Now do the right thing.

[AntiGuv]

I've been close to writing Busby off, but if this year is going to be a mirror image of 1994, then I wouldn't be at all surprised if she wins. After I read Charlie Cook's commentary today on the macro versus micro political landscape, I went back and looked at the types of districts that the GOP picked up in 1994. Here's the breakdown in terms of partisan lean.

The GOP defeated 34 DEM incumbents. Of these:

5 were in 60%+ GOP districts
8 were in 55-60% GOP districts
4 were in 50-55% GOP districts
8 were in 45-50% GOP districts
7 were in 40-45% GOP districts
2 were in 39%- GOP districts

In fact, IL-05 was about a 33% GOP district and NJ-08 was about a 36% GOP district. More to the point, of the 34 Dem incumbents that were defeated, exactly half were in Dem leaning districts. 9 were in districts that were less GOP than the current CA-50 district is Dem.

Of the 22 open DEM seats picked up by the GOP, here was the partisan-lean breakdown.

6 were in 60%+ GOP districts
3 were in 55-60% GOP districts
7 were in 50-55% GOP districts
3 were in 45-50% GOP districts
3 were in 40-45% GOP districts

So, although the open seat ratio was more inherently GOP leaning, there were still 6 Dem leaning districts picked up by the GOP. The 4 open seats that were picked up by the Dems all had a strong Dem lean except for MN-06, which was slightly Dem.

And many of these seats were picked up by second or third tier challengers. Of course many of the Dem-leaning seats reverted to the Dems in subsequent elections (14 of the 23, to be exact), but for at least 1994 they were part of the GOP wave.

The reason that I was curious about the 1994 breakdown was because a great number of the competitive GOP seats this year have GOP leans in the low 50s. So, I was wondering to myself if these type of seats (in reverse) did indeed fall to the GOP in the 1994 wave, and sure enough they comprised nearly half of the GOP pick ups of that year. In fact, a good number of Dem-held seats fell to the GOP in 1994 that were more Dem-leaning than just about any competitive GOP-held seat this year is GOP leaning.

It's also worth noting that several of the huge 1994 upsets weren't even on the radar screen in May of that year.

[calcowgirl]

Because it could have national repercussions. It could cause a fundraising surge for Democrat Congressional candidates elsewhere.

Or, it could cause a fundraising surge for Conservative Republicans.

[calcowgirl]

Need to keep in mind that Cunningham put a big stink on republicans in this district. This isnt a normal election by any means.

And that stench was directly connected with only one of the GOP candidates running--the one the GOP chose to back. Stupid is as stupid does.

[quark]

Lots of party money coming in from both sides to run negative TV ads. Hoping there will be debates -- Bilbray would do well. The hatchet-faced Busby looks like what many suspect she may be, a lesbian.

[calcowgirl]

Where's the gun-control legislation for Bilbray? Why did the NRA give him an "F" rating? What about the Enviro-whacko legislation he voted for, bolting from the GOP majority position? What about the Pro-GLBT legislation? Why not show the WHOLE record, SCP?