Some votes are likely to draw scrutiny, particularly a series of votes in the 1990s against cracking down on illegal aliens. Those include a 1995 vote against limiting services other than emergency care and public education to illegal aliens — he was one of just six senators to oppose that proposal — and a 1996 vote against creating an employer verification system to help businesses filter out illegal aliens who apply for jobs.The problem with statements like these is they usually only tell a small part of the story. What else was in the bill? Was it full of unpalatable earmarks that made it worth voting against a measure you might otherwise support in order to block a bunch of things you don't?
As someone else pointed out, was the measure even constitutional?
The problem with statements like these is they usually only tell a small part of the story. What else was in the bill? Was it full of unpalatable earmarks that made it worth voting against a measure you might otherwise support in order to block a bunch of things you don't? Or, like a lot of articles on a lot of candidates, they choose to pick and choose votes that fit the story line instead of looking at the entire record or they take procedural votes and make them look like bill votes,.. (or worse, use bad information like what NumbersUSA posts..)
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Fred_Thompson_Immigration.htm