What would "Governor McClintock" have done differently than Governor Schwarzenegger? SB60 is gone, it's dead.
|
Posted on 12/16/2003 9:06:03 AM PST by go_tom
DOBBS: That is the nature of things. All right, thank you very much, Lisa Sylvester.
The nation's poorest borders have given rise to a host of problems for border states and beyond.
Joining me now, the author of the California law that would have given driver's license to illegal aliens. which was overturned in California this month. We're joined now by Democratic State Senator Gil Cedillo. Also joined by Republican State Senator Tom McClintock, who says licenses for illegals would dangerously undermine law enforcement. Joining us tonight appropriately enough from the state capital, Sacramento.
Gentlemen, good to have you with us.
STATE SEN. TOM MCCLINTOCK (R), CALIFORNIA: Thanks for having us.
DOBBS: Senator Cedillo, this law has been overturned. What is the next step? Is there a deal in the works between you and your supporters and Governor Schwarzenegger?
STATE SEN. GIL CEDILLO (D), CALIFORNIA: Yes. We're working very constructively with the governor, looking forward to craft a bill that will ensure that we have safe highways for all of California.
We want to make sure that the 22 million motorists who take to the highways every day know that we've done all that we can to make sure that every motorist is licensed, inspected and insured.
And so we're working in a very constructive manner with the governor, and we hope to have a bipartisan bill for the next session.
DOBBS: Senator McClintock, your thoughts?
MCCLINTOCK: Well, with all due respect, that's a specious argument. California already accepts a valid foreign driver's license as proof of competence to operate a motor vehicle in California. So this is not a safety issue.
It's not an insurance issue either. A foreign national can obtain insurance in their own country with extend coverage into the United States.
There's one purpose of this measure and only one purpose. It's to place valid state identification documents in the hands of illegal immigrants. And the only reason for doing that is to undermine the enforcement of our immigration laws.
DOBBS: Senator Cedillo, your thoughts?
CEDILLO: Well, I'm the author of the bill, and I'm telling you what the purpose is, why we introduced the bill. We've been working on this for five years. We're very clear.
Every Californian has a right to know, in a state where you are 22 million motorists taking to the highways every day, that we, the elected officials are doing everything we can to make sure that the highways are safe, that all motorists are licensed, tested and insured.
And one of the ways to do that is to make sure that a population of 22 million people who, for 65 years were able to meet the responsibilities of driving with a license, are able to meet those responsibilities again.
MCCLINTOCK: They didn't meet those responsibilities right now.
CEDILLO: That's not accurate.
MCCLINTOCK: It is. They're entitled...
CEDILLO: And we need to make sure that people have a responsibility and an opportunity to fulfill that responsibility. And so that's what we and the governor and I intend do in the upcoming session.
MCCLINTOCK: Gil if you're a foreign national, you can obtain a driver's license in your own country that entitles you to drive on California's roads. This is not a safety issue.
DOBBS: Let me ask you both...
CEDILLO: No, this is a safety issue. This is -- As I said, we have 22 million motorists, and they need know that every day we make sure their highways are safe.
DOBBS: Senator...
CEDILLO: Driving a vehicle is essential to living in California. And they have a right to know that we're doing all that we can.
And that's why, for 65 years this legislation served us well. And it served us well until 1994. Then we tried to play immigration politics with this bill in 1994, and we found out that it had zero effect on immigration. In fact, it was -- the opposite occurred. In fact, after 1994, we had increases in immigration in '94 and '95 and '96.
DOBBS: Senator Cedillo...
CEDILLO: Zero impact on that area.
DOBBS: Senator Cedillo, Senator McClintock, we're going to come right back you to. We're going to take a brief respite, as we settle that issue on this broadcast this evening. We thank you both for trying to do so. And we will be right back.
A major push in Congress to expand the size, the strength of the U.S. military. We'll be joined by Democratic Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, the author of the bill. She will be joining us later in the broadcast.
We'll be back with senators Cedillo and McClintock in just a moment. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: We're talking with Senator Gil Cedillo of California and Tom McClintock.
Gentlemen, I want to turn, if I may, to Senator Cedillo.
Senator McClintock said that any illegal alien, any resident of another nation is entitled to get a driver's license in their country and have it recognized in the state of California. Is that true or is it not?
CEDILLO: Lou, I just think that's inaccurate, and I think tat to the extent that the can (ph) is very time limited. But I think that's beside the point. I think the point is...
DOBBS: But, wait, Senator if I may, it may be beside the point but I just want to understand the veracity of the statement first, and then we can go to the issue of its relevance. Is it true, or is it not?
CEDILLO: I don't believe that's true. I don't believe that's accurate.
MCCLINTOCK: Of course, it's true. We just had a hearing on that, Gil. You asked the California Highway Patrol commissioner that question. And he told you that the state of California recognizes a valid foreign driver's license as proof of competence to operate a motor vehicle in this state.
If you're not going to get trained in your own country to obtain a driver's license, what makes you think you're going to get one here?
The only purpose of this is to obtain a valid state identification document that, before your bill, said not only that you're competent to drive a motor vehicle but you're also legally a resident of California. For that reason, the driver's license was used for everything from financial transactions to security clearance at airports.
By giving these licenses to people who are in this country illegally, you have just destroyed the value of the driver's license as authentic proof of legal residency for every one of the millions of California drivers who currently hold one.
CEDILLO: Now, with all due respect, Senator McClintock, I don't believe that statement is accurate. I believe the commissioner indicated that the use was time limited, maybe to 90 days, if I recall correctly. But the point is that we are...
MCCLINTOCK: You're only supposed to be here for 90 days.
CEDILLO: I understand -- trained, licensed and insured, trained by our laws with our regulations...
MCCLINTOCK: Our laws say they're not supposed to be here to begin with. Our laws say they're supposed to be...
CEDILLO: Senator, you know, you and I agree not to interrupt each other, so let me finish.
So we want to make sure people are trained, licensed and insured in compliance with our laws. For 65 years, this was the law of California, and it served us well. It should serve us well again.
The failure of the bill when it was changed was that it made our highways more dangerous. We're trying to reconcile our laws to our reality and work with something that worked for us for 65 years. I think that's a great idea.
MCCLINTOCK: You talk about compliance with our laws. Illegal immigrants are here in direct defiance of the most fundamental of our laws, our immigration laws.
The United States has the most open immigration policy of any nation in the world. There are millions of people who are waiting in line to legally become American citizens and are willing to abide by our immigration laws to do so.
Illegal immigration is the process of people cutting in front of these folks in line. I don't believe that kind of behavior should be rewarded. And when you talk about people who ought to comply with our laws, you're talking about people who are deliberately violating our laws to be here in the first place.
CEDILLO: I understand that, Senator. But you also -- and that's probably an argument you're going to have to take up with the head of homeland security, Mr. Ridge, who has argued that perhaps there is eight to 12 million people we should legalize.
But that is beside the point with respect to what is, as the law indicates, our jurisdictional responsibility. Our jurisdictional responsibility as it applies to California is that you and I have a constitutional obligation to make sure that our highways are safe for all California motorists.
General (ph) and I are obligated to do that. We took an oath to do that, and you and I should work to accomplish that.
MCCLINTOCK: We have an obligation to defend the sovereignty of the United States, and if measures like yours become law, it's going to be infinitely more difficult to do so.
DOBBS: Gentlemen...
CEDILLO: We had a record of 65 years where our sovereignty was well in tact while we ensured all motorists were licensed, tested and insured. And you know that to be a case. That's not an argument, that's history.
DOBBS: We've got very...
MCCLINTOCK: These are very different times.
DOBBS: Sorry, Senator McClintock, I interrupted you.
MCCLINTOCK: I was going to say those were far different times.
DOBBS: Senator Cedillo...
CEDILLO: No. No, they're the same. We had all the same concerns for security that we have today and also concerns for sovereignty.
We went through World War II. We hunted communists in our universities. We were concerned about young people in the '60s. We spied upon them. We were concerned about...
DOBBS: Gentlemen -- Gentlemen, if I may just interject with one thing. Seventy percent of the people of California, gentlemen, in the most recent polls, just about 70 percent, almost 70 percent, said they don't want this, period. Driver's licenses for illegal aliens.
How do you respond to them? And it was one of the principle issues in Governor Schwarzenegger's campaign. How do you respond to them?
CEDILLO: Well, we respond to them like we did, Lou, is we went -- And I personally was one of the co-authors of the recall in a bipartisan effort, working with the governor, we repealed SB-60. I was the author of that bill and worked with on it for five years.
We've listened to the people. We've listened to what their concerns are. And with the governor, and I imagine in a bipartisan manner, we are going to propose new legislation that will address the concerns that were raised during the debates and during the floor debates and come back with legislation shortly in January that will address those concerns. And also address the concerns of 22 million motorists to make sure that our highways are safe and secure.
MCCLINTOCK: I don't understand how that's going to work. You're going to do a background check on people. The background check's going to determine one of two things. Either they're here in the country legally, in which case they don't need this bill; they're already entitled to a driver's license, or they're in this country illegally and the law requires they be deported.
I don't see how you compromise on that issue.
DOBBS: Well, General (ph) we'll look forward to finding out how you all do compromise on that issue, if the art of politics is fruitful in this case. Senator Gil Cedillo, Senator Tom McClintock, we thank, gentlemen, both for being here. We hope you'll return to discuss this important issue.
MCCLINTOCK: Thank you.
CEDILLO: Thank you very much.
DOBBS: Coming up next, expanding the size and the strength of the U.S. military, a movement gaining moment in many Congress and leading much of that momentum, Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, member of the House Armed Services Committee and the author of legislation that would expand the military. She's our guest next.
Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MCCLINTOCK: " ... You're going to do a background check on people. The background check's going to determine one of two things. Either they're here in the country legally, in which case they don't need this bill; they're already entitled to a driver's license, or they're in this country illegally and the law requires they be deported. I don't see how you compromise on that issue."
I know my elected officials are doing nothing about the thousands of Mexican drivers who cross the border in Tijuana and Mexicali into San Diego and Imperial counties every day, who don't comply with California emissions, don't have insurance, don't have California drivers licenses, and, in many cases, are driving very unsafe vehicles. The common theme persists - placating Mexicans.
DOBBS: But, wait, Senator if I may, it may be beside the point but I just want to understand the veracity of the statement first, and then we can go to the issue of its relevance. Is it true, or is it not?
CEDILLO: I don't believe that's true. I don't believe that's accurate.
Of course, Gilberto is lying here. He knows the illegals can get licenses in their own country. As a practical matter, though, if they go back to Mexico to get their licenses, they won't be let back into the country.
(Guess who won)
There can be no reasonable argument for licensing illegals "with a background check," as any background check is going to show that they are in the U.S. illegally.
No licenses for illegals, period.
I have heard him hint this a number of times. I could be an optimist and say that Gil is being led down the prim rose path...but I doubt it, even during the campaign the Gov was weak on immigration.
What would "Governor McClintock" have done differently than Governor Schwarzenegger? SB60 is gone, it's dead.
|
I have no "props" for Arny. He is the most left-wing RINO in the country, and he will ultimately be a disaster for Republicans and for California. Within 24 months, illegals will have drivers licenses (albiet after a "background check".) Nothing will be discussed regarding following the LAW and deporting them
The deficit will be papered over short term with bonds, the tax burden/unfriendly business environment will not decrease, nor will the deficits go away (without spending constraints.) And bimbo eruptions will plague Arny like they did Clinton, ultimately showing that core moral values are no more a component of Republicans than of Democrats.
He is not a conservative by any stretch. He is barely a RINO.
Don't forget that conservatives that try to run in CA will be shouted down even more than the past by the wanna-be strategists set as "unelectable" and "too out of the CA mainstream" because of the success of a "moderate" like (R)nold.
No one wants to give credit where it is truely do; he ran on being a celebrity body builder who didn't take a whole lot of positions and won in an election without a primary. Bravo. Meanwhile people who understand that you don't borrow your way out of debt are poo-pooed as too ideological.
Who wants to bet that the powers that be don't support Howard Kooligan for Senate because of this wonderful precident for "success" in CA.
PRESIDENT BUSH: "Well, first of all, I have constantly said that we need to have a immigration policy THAT HELPS MATCH ANY WILLING EMPLOYER WITH ANY WILLING EMPLOYEE.
Bush is very weak on immigration, no one should deny that. Its the weakest part of his Admin, other than public speaking ability... But what is most important here is that even Bush, on his WORST day, never has hinted at giving driver's licenses to anyone. SB60 isn't just amnesty for who ever is here, its amnesty---for anyone who can cross the border forever. We can't "background check" effectively people who live here, but the Senate and the Gov want us to trust Mexican and Central American "Databases" of criminal conduct? If such things exist, we are more than likely going to GET their criminals, not have them deported back. The very idea your guy is floating is insulting.
White House budget director Joshua Bolten said much the same but also conceded that worse fiscal numbers were on the horizon, estimating the gap for the new year "will likely exceed $500 billion even with the strengthening economy."
Apples and Oranges, the federal debt is not something that has to be paid off, like a state debt does. Sacramento,if they outspend their means as they have done for 5 years will have to get bonds in the real world...and those bond traders get PAID.
We are at a critical point in State spending, unlike Federal, where we have the opportunity to wipe out the debt with small cuts. If we paper over this problem now, the next generation won't have that opportunity, and the problem will compound itself. I hear from your old conservative nemisis McClintock that NY City just this year rolled over their now 25-year-old debt yet again. Local government doesnt' solve problems with borrowing any more than companies or people.
Fiscal Conservatives understand this already.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.