Ted Cruz Evades Important Question: Would You Deport U.S. Citizens?

Reason.com ^ | August 26,2015 | Matt Welch

[Hojczyk]

Last night on Donald Trump's least favorite Fox News program, The Kelly File, GOP contender Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) also went after the suddenly controversial interviewer, complaining that a question she kept pressing him on—whether he'd deport the U.S.-citizen children of illegal immigrants, as Donald Trump would—is "the question every mainstream media liberal journalist wants to ask." Sick burn!

Anyway, the question—which Cruz, to his discredit, refused to answer—is an important one for those many 2016 GOP candidates (Trump, Cruz, Scott Walker, Rand Paul, Rick Santorum, Lindsey Graham, Bobby Jindal, etc.) who have come out against the birthright citizenship established by the plain text of the 14th amendment. We get that you wish to change the existing rules somehow (Trump and Ron Paul, to name two people, think you can do so without a constitutional amendment), but what to do about the estimated 4 million American-citizen kids having at least one illegal-immigrant parent? Given the rapid Trumpification of the 2016 nominating process, and Cruz's demonstrated readiness to strip U.S. citizenship in other contexts, the issue of forcibly expelling Americans from their native country—regardless of how appalling—is a live one, demanding clarification.

Here's a detail that rarely gets brought up during nonsense-filled immigration debates: President Barack Obama has been a much bigger deporter-in-chief than George W. Bush. The Department of Homeland Security issued 2 million deportations during Bush's tenure; Obama blew through that number in Year Five of his presidency:

The administration has since made a sharp policy turn, triggering some of the heated debate we've seen over the past year, but there's no guarantee that his late-breaking deportation slowdown would be carried on by the next Democratic president, particularly if it's restrictionist Bernie Sanders.

[Pajamajan]

Work permits are not amnesty.

[Mad Dawgg]

"How are they going to get into Canada?"

Only 32 miles of the 4000 mile border has reached an acceptable level of security revealed by a study done by the Government Accountability Office. It is the only area that the federal government has control. The remaining 3968 miles does not have the ability to detect illegal activity across the northern border.

The reality of the situation is there is less security on the Northern border than there is on the Southern border.

[kabar]

LOL. These are green cards. They can do everything but vote. They can even sponsor their families to join them.

So it is okay to allow them to have work permits so they can compete legally against Americans and LPRs? We have the lowest labor participation rates in 38 years. More than half of the illegal aliens lack even a high school diploma. Do we really need millions of high school dropouts, unskilled and uneducated? What about jobs for our own citizens?

They will be entitled to SS, Medicare, and Medicaid. They will take more out of these programs than what they contributed. Medicare and SS are going broke.

Does Cruz think we are stupid that he can propose legalization with a path to citizenship? Do yoiu think the courts will permit what amounts to second-class citizenship? Do you thing the Dems will make it a big political issue? How can you deny citizenship to people who are here permanently, pay taxes, and are eligible to serve in the military be denied the right to vote? It will never pass in Congress.

In any event, legalization is amnesty. Cruz can play games of what the meaning of "is" is, but it doesn't change the reality.

[kabar]

The increase in number of illegal immigrants in the US poses a great threat to the country since these illegal aliens are connected with issues such as smuggling, identity theft, human trafficking, marketing fraud, and terrorism.

As I said, the inability of the US to control its Southern border poses a threat to Canadian security. Any wall on the Northern border is to prevent the bad guys from getting into Canada from the US. We need to get control of our Southern border, which will make the Northern border more secure for Canada.

The reality of the situation is there is less security on the Northern border than there is on the Southern border.

And do you know why that is the case? It has to do with risk assessment. We don't need as much security on the Northern border as we do on the Southern border.

You didn't answer my question: Do we need a wall between Alaska and Canada?

[kabar]

...that he can propose legalization without (vice with) a path to citizenship?

[Mad Dawgg]

"We don't need as much security on the Northern border as we do on the Southern border."

Well if you are only worried about illegals but Terrorists well see The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency office says you are wrong and I am right:

Canadian Border Bigger Terror Threat Than Mexican Border, Says Border Patrol Chief

And as far as Alaska goes once we secure the lower 48 we can work on a plan for Alaska.

Illegal aliens are part of the problem not the only problem securing our borders means keeping out the nutters with chemical and biological weapons and shoulder fired missiles to take down planes etc. Right now they can sneak onto Canada's borders and drive across the Northern Border and we would never know.

We can build multiple Border Guard/military bases on both borders and give some much needed jobs to younger adults and they would be doing something useful. It is a win/win situation. Doing nothing on the Northern Border is defeatism/liberal dogma.

[kabar]

The link you provided goes back to 2011. Canada just passed C-51, a very tough anti-terrorism bill

Regardless, a wall is not necessary to stop terrorists from coming into the US. Even the report you cited noted that CBP figures for fiscal year 2010 indicate that 447,731 illegal crossers were apprehended along the southwest border and 7,431 along the U.S.-Canada border.

No serious person suggests we build a wall on our Northern border. Can you cite anyone who recommends that?

[Mad Dawgg]

"CBP figures for fiscal year 2010 indicate that 447,731 illegal crossers were apprehended along the southwest border and 7,431 along the U.S.-Canada border."

Ah yeah that is the point. They effectively control 32 miles of the 4000 mile Northern Border which means they would have way less illegals apprehended. And, the same report tells us that more terrorists cross the Northern border.

And we have not even talked about the Illegal Drug Trade. Bottom Line closing the Southern Border and leaving the Northern Border open will reduce illegals crossing the Southern Border but then more will cross the Northern Border and along with drug mules and the bad guys etc.

Can you give us a good reason to not build a wall on the Northern Border? And no "cost" is not a good reason. Stopping nefarious nutters the ability to wander over the line anytime they please is worth every penny we would spend on building the wall.

[kabar]

Can you give us a good reason to not build a wall on the Northern Border? And no "cost" is not a good reason. Stopping nefarious nutters the ability to wander over the line anytime they please is worth every penny we would spend on building the wall.

I gave you plenty of reasons. Canada is not Mexico. Canada actually has control over immigration and who is in their country.

Physical barriers are force multipliers when it comes to securing the border. We don't have a mass invasion from our Northern Border. Canadians are not fleeing to the US nor are other countries using it to transit thru to the US.

We don't have drug cartels operating in Canada nor are there spotters operating on the Northern border inside the US facilitating the influx of drugs. The US has lost control of security on the Southern border up to 80 miles inside the US. That is not the case with Canada.

You don't stop terrorists with walls or fences. Intelligence is the main weapon. We are working closely with Canada in that regard and they are putting in place much stricter controls exemplified by C-51.

You still avoided my question about building a wall between Alaska and Canada? Why? Because you know how silly that would be. It would be just as silly as building a wall along Florida because drug smugglers are entering by boat or small planes.

And in a nation with a $19 trillion national debt and over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities (entitlement programs) how can you rule out costs? You use a risk assessment process to prioritize your needs. Building a wall along our Northern border is nonsense and you know it.

[Mad Dawgg]

"I gave you plenty of reasons. Canada is not Mexico. Canada actually has control over immigration and who is in their country."

Yet The US Border Patrol says more terrorist cross the Canadian Border than the Mexican Border so apparently you are wrong yet again. "Physical barriers are force multipliers when it comes to securing the border."

Eggsactly Batman! Thank you for proving my point. The most costly part of any government program is wages of all the people involved. Build a Wall on the Canadian Border and you need literally thousands less people patrolling it. Thank you for pointing out it will be a cost savings to build a wall.

"We don't have drug cartels operating in Canada nor are there spotters operating on the Northern border inside the US facilitating the influx of drugs. The US has lost control of security on the Southern border up to 80 miles inside the US. That is not the case with Canada."

Yeah not lost control of the Northern Border yeah uh huh OK. US agents close cross-border drug tunnel Elaborate passage dug beneath Canada line

"The tunnel, measuring nearly 100 yards long and equipped with electricity and a ventilation system, began under a Quonset hut on the Canadian side and led to an abandoned home in Lynden, Wash., just across the border."

A tunnel as long as a football field. I would suspect a bit of money was spent on that. And this one they found remember 32 miles out of 4000 they claim they can control. How many more tunnels and routes across the border are being used. Like you said if we had a wall for a force multiplier we could send more guys looking for these things.

Then there is this:

Illegal drug exports deprioritized at Canadian border due to lack of resources Canadian agents told to focus on nuclear material, stolen cars due to a lack of resources

So Canada does not have the money to police the border and when the drugs dry up at one border they will fire up on the other because the money will be even better. "You still avoided my question about building a wall between Alaska and Canada? Why? Because you know how silly that would be"

Actually I did just the opposite I didn't say we should not build a wall there I said we should get the lower 48 secure and then deal with Alaska. Then we build a Border defense there too.

"And in a nation with a $19 trillion national debt and over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities (entitlement programs) how can you rule out costs?"

Because if you are going to secure the border you need more guys patrolling it remember 32 miles out of 4000 is claimed to be controlled. Hiring enough people to do it WITHOUT A WALL would be waaaaaay too costly remember you proved my point a Wall is a "Force Multiplier" once built it allows us to use far fewer people to control the border.

Bottom line, we can't afford to NOT build a wall on All the Borders.

[kabar]

Bottom line, we can't afford to NOT build a wall on All the Borders.