Transcript: Tom McClintock Debates Gil Cedillo, author of illegal licenses bill

CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight ^ | 12/15/2003 | Tom McClintock/Gil Cedillo

[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)

[Amerigomag]

Congrats. Very sharp observation. Let me give you an insider's peek at what's going on because you are the first member of the forum to catch the deception. Please excuse the length of the reply but you deserve the details.

In the truest sense both Prop 57 and 58 are shams. The object of the sham is to get the electorate to suspend, recind or repeal the constitution's restrictions, even temporarily, which then removes the voters from the loop. The governance can then legally indebt without the voters specific imput. Hers's how it's being done.

Quick background. You'll remember from basic California civics that you can't include more than one issue in a single initiative. For example, you can't either rescind, repeal or suspend provisions of the constitution AND authorize a specific bond on the same initiative. Two initiatives are required. That's were Prop 58 comes in. It not only enables Prop 57 but it also enables the legislature, without the currently required specific voters consent, to accomplish the same thing if Prop 57 fails.

The game plan is sound. How do we (the governance) get the electorate to approve a measure, the bond, that is not terribly popular. Answer. We don't. If we want to borrow we really only need the amendmentment and if we also get the bond it's a plus but it is not necessary. We can always legally borrow the money, without the voters specific approval if we can just get them to, even temporarily, suspend the constitutional restrictions.

So this is what we're going to do.

1) Not emphasize to the voters that what we are proposing is extrodinary by allowing them to become aware that both Propositions are required to authorize the bond. Too much knowlege leads too many embarassing explanations of the gravity of what we are doing.

2)Propose Prop 57, which is controversial, so that the electortate will focus on only that issue. Let the opposition's energy and resources be spent fighting Prop 57 and hope they will disregard Prop 58 because it appears to be close enough to the voters will to be a slam dunk.

3)Frame Prop 58 in a manner that belies it true purpose, allowing the governance to indebt without specific approval, yet appears to be meeting the demands of the mob: a "sort of" spending cap.

When and if you can get your hands on the first legislative draft of Prop 58, review it with a careful eye, not only for what it authorizes, but also for what it does NOT exclude: General fund borrowing, by the legislature and the governor with out the currenlty, necessaary approval of the electorate.

[heleny]

Thanks, but I'm not the person who figured out Prop 58 is bad. Calcowgirl explained it to me yesterday on another thread. And, obviously you got it, too, as well as the treacherous strategy behind it. Yikes!

Your explanation would probably be better posted on http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1041469/posts, which discusses McClintock's ABX5 9 speech (where I got the quote) and Prop 57.

If you start a thread for ACAX5 5 or Prop 58, you might need to get something from McClintock in the title to attract more attention (from his supporters and from his detractors), unfortunately. Most people don't care about the props yet.

[VU4G10]

	"Come to grips" with an estimated 8 million to 12 million illegal immigrants and "determine how we can legalize their presence."

[Amerigomag]

Calcowgirl explained it to me yesterday on another thread. And, obviously you got it, too,

Nope. I'm not the author of the explanation nor did I get it from Calcowgirl. I posted the explanation anonymously as soon as I received the author's email this afternoon. The reply to you was the result of reading your comment just after having read the email. They were remarkably similar and someting I hadn't realized. Remember the topic of this thread is widely seperated from the shenanigan described. Sorry.

The author is apparently having serious second thoughts about what he/she helped achieved in October. Reading between the lines of the introductory part of the email, I don't think the author realized the degree of spousal influence in the new executive. The author requested anonymity because while his/her name is probably not easily recognizable on this forum it would be to the person whoes signature is now on the bottom of the author's paycheck.

If you start a thread for ACAX5 5 or Prop 58,

In view of the current war on vanities I'll pass. Calcowgirl will spread the word.

[truth_seeker]

"What would "Governor McClintock" have done differently than Governor Schwarzenegger?"

Gov. McClintock would not get himself elected, whereas Gov. Schwarzenegger got himself elected.

Lotta difference.

[heleny]

Tom McClintock explains it in the last few paragraphs of his floor speech on ACAX5 5 "Budget Reserve Act," which is incorporated into Prop 58.

http://www.tommcclintock.com/newsroom/details.cfm?pr_id=PR031212C

........
It is a radical departure from 154 years of constitutional law.

It temporarily repeals one of the oldest provisions of the state constitution—a provision that dates back to the original constitution of 1849. Since statehood, the constitution has required that bonds can only be used for a "single object or work."

Since statehood, the constitution has prevented one generation from passing on its day-to-day expenses to the next. This measure temporarily removes that provision so that you can do what no generation before you has ever dared to do: steal from the future.

Let us be honest. This is nothing but a Trojan Horse. Its façade is appealing but pointless. But hidden inside is the power for one generation to pillage and plunder the future to pay for its own appetite—a power that the Constitution has held at bay for 154 years.

THAT is the purpose of this measure. That is the SOLE purpose of this measure.

And that is why, sadly, I must cast a no vote today.

Thanks for sharing the information you got. Maybe your source heard/read Tom's speech, too. I should have just read his page first, instead of making people on FR explain it, which doubtless will be asked another 100 times before the election!

I hope talk show hosts and news/editorial writers figure it out, too, before they influence people on Prop 58 when the election nears.

[DumpsterDiver]

Richard Alarcon's sister is the head of the CA Communist Party.

This interests me. Do you happen to know her name?

[TomasUSMC]

Just finished watching the revised History Channel's "Alamo", complete with calling the defenders Illegal Aliens and Pirates, Jim Bowie not fighting at all, and only 60 Mexican KIA, and increasing the garrison
to 250. Calling the Mexicans very diciplined blah blah blah.

Remember this, the first battle of the Alamo was when the Texans took it from the Mexicans. In that Battle their were 300 Texans with no cannon against 1200 mexicans and artillary inside the Alamo. It took the Texans 1 day. No siege, no artillery, just the SPIRIT OF FREE MEN, WUPPIN BUTT. The Mexicans were allowed to leave with only having to give their word they would not return. They broke their word and offered no quarter to the Alamo's garrison a few months later.

Illegal immigration now is rewriting history.

[TomasUSMC]

THAT HELPS MATCH ANY WILLING EMPLOYER WITH ANY WILLING Prision slave laborer in China.

Guess what. President Bush is not right on immigration, he is wrong. Once we win the war on terrorist, we can start one on illegal immigration, Nafta, and Gatt. It may be to late then but first things first. Islamist are killing Americans now, Illegals are killing Americans off slowly. First things first.

[Amerigomag]

Maybe your source heard/read Tom's speech, too.

Again nope.

The pity is that McClintock wasn't more specific. That McClintock didn't specifically say.

"If you don't vote for Prop 57 it doesn't really matter because the bonds will be legally authorized anyway. If Prop 57 is defeated it doesn't really matter because the bonds will be legally authorized anyway. If Prop 58 is passed, even if Prop 57 fails, the bonds will be legally authorized by the legislature without your direct approval as long as the legislation refers to the bonding as the California Economic Recovery Bonds.

[sully777]

Now I understand why McClintock is unloved by certain people. He doesn't fit into their agenda. I guess he's still playing spoiler!

[RS]

"Governor Schwarzeneggar and company say there's no deal.

If, however, the Governor is "working very constructively" with Cedillo and the Illegal Alien CDL lobby "to craft a bill that will ensure that we have safe highways for all of California," what's the difference? "


... and just when was it that STATE SEN. GIL CEDILLO became someone whose statements could be trusted as fact ?

[Pelham]

It will be back, Arnold will "fix it." Then we will collect signatures and overturn his Illegal Alien CDL bill.

Just like clockwork. And it will interesting to see Arnold's reaction when he finds the fury of the California voter going against him, instead of for him. I don't think he believes this will happen. Yet.

[calcowgirl]

Thanks heleny... for keeping me in the loop on the discussion (I was away for a couple days). I'm hoping we see more exposure in the media of the downside to proposition 58. It appears like one of those warm fuzzy propositions.... but the devil is always in the details.

No on 55!
No on 56!
No on 57!
No on 58!

[Pro-Bush]

Ping! A must read!

[JustPiper]

Clearing throat, M? Are you sure I must read? ;)

Pssssssssssst

[RS]

"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.
Gee, thanks, Arnie. I'm sure glad I voted for McClintock. I just wish everyone had."

I'm surprised - For some reason I was under the impression that you did not take as Gospel the words of Sen. Cedillo.

Since you obviously now believe everything he says, then you must believe that SB60 is great for California also.

[RS]

"A 13.5 percent reduction effective January 1st would cure the entire deficit in 18 months "

Y'know ... I wonder what a Governor should do if a business whose payroll and purchases spends 13 Billion in this State announced that they were just going to fire all their employees and shut down in the next two weeks ? What steps he would have to take to insure that CA's economy dosen't fall into a pit - How long it would take to dig out from a hit like that ?

[usadave]

Cedillo is placing race before nationality by striving to help his fellow Latinos, the illegal aliens, at all costs.

[Nea Wood]

Yes, I "obviously now believe everything Cedillo says." That's quite a leap for you to come to that conclusion just from what I posted. Obviously you voted for Arnold and don't like McClintock. Fine. You have a right to your opinion. My opinion is that Arnold will reintroduce the driver's license bill and try to sneak it back in, but with "background checks" or some other add-on which will supposedly make it all "okay." We'll see who turns out to be right. But kindly do not read things into what I say.