Saturday, June 03, 2006

Immigration: Talent vs. McCaskill

One issue Senator Talent lasered in on during his official campaign kick-off Friday was immigration. There are a bunch of charges being hurled around regarding the borders. Here are their records:

Talent recently voted against a Senate bill that would have placed many illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship after paying penalties and waiting for years. Talent called the bill amnesty and said Claire McCaskill supports it. "She's made proposals that I think amount to amnesty," Talent said yesterday.

But just a few weeks ago, McCaskill told me she would have also opposed the Senate bill. "I am against the guest worker provisions," she said.

Senator Talent also repeatedly said McCaskill is against controlling the borders, or constructing a fence on the borders. McCaskill says not so.

"I am for a fence but want to make sure there's adequate technology we can use to be more effective. I'm not opposed to a fence, but it's not the only answer," McCaskill said.

When it comes to what to do with the millions of illegal immigrants already here, neither has a clear solution.

"I know this as a former prosecutor, I can not support people not being held accountable for breaking the law," McCaskill said. She added that she did not want to necessarily put illegals in jail, but prosecute them so they have to pay fines, go on probation or do community service.

Talent says he's not for rounding up illegal immigrants either.

"I'm not for rounding people up and busting them or anything like that," Talent said.

It's clear that on this touchy topic of immigration, it is easier for both candidates to say what they are not for, rather than what they are for.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Good call. You are correct, Dave. It is easier for either candidate to say what they are not for than what they support.

I hope hope we can get an honest debate from these two about what particular elements of the senate they would support or oppose - of course the wild card would be for the bill to be passed - then we move on to actual policy and potential nationalized talking points.