Senator Berates DREAMers, Says They Don’t Have Anything To Teach Him

BY ESTHER YU-HSI LEE/Think Progress

The viral video of an eight-minute confrontation between two undocumented immigrants and Rep. Steve King (R-IA) Monday was an uncomfortable reminder of how extreme elements within the Republican party are alienating minority voters. But the person who could see the most political fallout from the incident is a senator caught on film awkwardly excising himself early on from the table with his staff.

Potential 2016 presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who has touted himself as an outspoken champion for GOP outreach, maintained to Fox News that he left because he had another interview, but many are accusing him of distancing himself from the immigration reform debate entirely.

Explaining his departure Wednesday during a radio interview in Iowa, Paul said, “I’ll be honest with you, I’m not interested in being filmed and berated by people who broke the law and are here illegally to try and convince me about policy. But I’ll tell you I have sympathy for the DREAM Act kids. I’m actually a moderate on immigration.”

Peculiarly, the two undocumented immigrants, Erika Andiola and Cesar Vargas, are exactly the so-called “DREAM Act kids” for whom Paul should express sympathy, as they were illegally brought to the United States as minors. Paul previously said that legalization should “start with DREAM Act kids,” alluding to a federal immigration bill that would have granted an earned pathway to citizenship for some qualified undocumented immigrants. Andiola and Vargas are also among the more than 550,000 recipients of an executive order known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that grants work authorization and deportation relief for two years. But they were in Iowa to confront King who has continuously pushed for legislation that would gut the DACA program. Each time, the House has voted to kill the program.

The cognitive dissonance between the two statements said moments apart by Paul was not lost on the Democratic National Committee Director of Hispanic Media Pili Tobar who said, “Rand Paul attacks young people brought to America through no fault of their own and in the next sentence says he’s a new type of Republican and that he’s a moderate on immigration. Rand Paul is proving that he’s no better – and no different – than far-right Republicans like Steve King.”

Similarly, Andiola told MSNBC host Jose Diaz-Balart Wednesday morning, “the reality is that if you have someone who is actually affected by it try to talk to you, you don’t run away. You actually sit there and actually try to talk.” She added that Paul’s insincerity on the issue could hurt him in the 2016 presidential race, “I don’t know if Rand Paul actually learned a lesson from Mitt Romney, but Mitt Romney lost his election with the Latino vote because he didn’t support the DREAM Act and because he believed in self-deportation.”

Just 17 months ago, Paul said in a speech to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce that some of his values stemmed from his formative years getting to know undocumented immigrants. “At a young age, I came to understand that it makes a difference whether you are a documented immigrant or an undocumented immigrant,” Paul remarked in March 2013. “That the existence was not easy for the undocumented but that opportunity in America somehow trumped even the poor living conditions and low pay… Somewhere along the line Republicans have failed to understand and articulate that immigrants are an asset to America, not a liability.” But he has gradually moved faster and further away from that position, stating that he would not support the Senate’s comprehensive immigration reform bill and accusing the President Obama of “poisoning the well” by using an executive order to create the DACA program. And as MSNBC pointed out, Paul endorsed legislation in 2011 to end the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship.

GOP Immigration Guru Insists DREAMers Should Self-Deport

By Igor Volsky/Think Progress

On Monday, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), a long-time advocate of the DREAM Act, strongly rebuked a GOP witness for opposing a pathway to citizenship for young immigrants brought into the country illegally by their parents. The witness, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, rose to prominence for advising Mitt Romney’s “self-deportation” immigration policy during the 2012 presidential campaign and is the architect of both Arizona’s infamous “show your papers” law (SB 1070) and the Republican Party’s harsh immigration platform.

Speaking at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing, Kobach insisted that DREAM eligible applicants, many of whom have lived in the United States for most of their lives, should not be rewarded for the “sins of their parents.” Instead, DREAMers should go back to their parents’ country of origin, Kobach said, and “get in line with the rest of their countrymen.”

“That just defies basic compassion,” Durbin shot back, pointing to to Gabby Pacheco, an undocumented immigrant brought to America at the age of eight from Ecuador, who was testifying alongside Kobach. “She’s never known any other country,” Durbin explained, “this is her home.” Watch it:

Kobach responded by reviving self-deportation, arguing that “if you ratchet up the penalties for violating the law, people choose to leave.”

But Durbin predicted that the momentum has shifted from deportation to reform after the 2012 election. “Ultimately the voters have the last word. The voters had the last word on self-deportation on Nov. 6, so we’re beyond that now,” he said.

Under the bill introduced by the Senate’s so-called Gang of 8, individuals in DREAM Act Status can receive their green cards in 5 years and will be eligible for citizenship immediately after. The status only applies to students who entered the U.S. at age 15 or younger and have lived in the the country for at least five years.

Later in the hearing, Kobach argued that “declining to remove an unlawfully present alien is actually amnesty-plus, because — if you liken it to theft — you’re given the person what he is taken, namely presence in the United States. He’s taken it unlawfully, so you’re not only declined to punish, but you also allow him to have what he has taken.”

Not A Dream: Romney’s Top 5 Comments On Immigration During The Republican Primary

Steven Perlberg/guest blogger for Think Progress

Earlier this afternoon, President Obama announced a new “deferred action” immigration policy that would protect students in the U.S. who are already in deportation proceedings or those who qualify for the DREAM Act and have yet to come forward to the Department of Homeland Security from being deported.

Confronted with the president’s landmark announcement, Mitt Romney attempted to whitewash his draconian immigration views during a campaign stop in New Hampshire today. Romney told reporters that he “agrees with Marco Rubio,” who has proposed a DREAM Act alternative.

This newfound belief is a far cry from his views during the primary campaign. Here are Romney’s top 5 comments on immigration during the Republican primary:

1. Romney attacked Governor Rick Perry for supporting the DREAM Act, calling it a “magnet for illegal immigration.”: In a Florida GOP debate, Romney accused Governor Rick Perry of engendering a “magnet” in Texas by allowing the children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition. Romney maintained that even though many children had no part in their families’ decisions to immigrate to the United States, they should not be able to have the same academic opportunities as their peers. [September 2011, USA Today]

2. Romney pledged to veto the DREAM Act: In December, Mitt Romney promised to veto the DREAM Act if he were elected president. Then during a January GOP debate, Romney called allowing any undocumented workers to gain permanent residency “a mistake.” [December 2011, ABC News]

3. Romney promised to make life so miserable for undocumented immigrants that they would “self-deport.”: At the Florida Republican Debate, Romney said that he would enforce stringent documentation policies that would make it difficult for illegal immigrations to find work, eventually spurring them to “self-deport.” According to Romney, “If people don’t get work here they’re going to self-deport to a place where they can get work.” [January 2012,Huffington Post]

4. Romney rebuffed undocumented young woman who was brought to the U.S. at age 10 and had a 4.0 grade-point average: Romney had a particularly awkward encounter when an undocumented worker demanded to know why he wouldn’t support the DREAM Act. After the young woman informed Romney of her 4.0 grade point average, the former governor was quickly ushered away by aides. [January 2012, The Hill]

5. Romney consults author of extreme anti-immigrant legislation on immigration issues: Romney consults Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State and author of harsh immigration laws in Arizona, South Carolina, and Alabama, as an advisor. Kobach is a controversial figure who has become the leading spokesman of the hardcore anti-immigration movement. [April 2012, ThinkProgress]

Romney gets confronted about his opposition to the Dream Act

By Andrew Jones/Raw Story

GOP presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney received a stern question from an unexpected source Tuesday evening.

While coming out of an event in New York City, Romney encountered an immigrant named Lucy who asked him about his stance on the DREAM Act.

“Are you going to support the DREAM Act?” she asked.

“I already said, across the country, I would veto the Dream Act,” Romney said.

“I’m undocumented,” Lucy replied. “I want to know then, why are you not supporting my dream?”

The former Massachusetts governor said, “Because if someone comes here illegally,” before Lucy cut him off.

“But I didn’t come here illegally,” she said. “And I have a 4.0 GPA.”

“That’s wonderful,” Romney answered back, before walking away.

Romney vowed a few weeks ago he would veto the DREAM act as president if the legislation made it to his desk. The DREAM Act would give undocumented immigrants a path to legal residency and citizenship by meeting certain guidelines, including showing proof they entered the country before age 16 or graduated from a U.S. high school.

WATCH: Video from Youtube, which was published on January 17, 2012.

Rep. Rohrabacher Suggests White People Will ‘Lose Our Freedom’ If The DREAM Act Passes

By Alex Seitz-Wald

In their efforts to bring down the DREAM Act, which would give children of undocumented immigrants who complete college or volunteer for the military a path to citizenship, conservatives have been smearing the bill as “backdoor amnesty” for undocumented immigrants and claiming it creates a loophole for terrorists. Unfortunately, many of their attacks have also taken on racial undertones. Yesterday, Fox News host Glenn Beck told a caller on his radio show that the bill would disenfranchise white people, saying, “if you’re white or you’re an American citizen or a white American citizen, you’re pretty much toast.” Beck suggested his caller steal a Mexican ID card in to receive the supposedly preferential treatment minorities will receive under DREAM.

While clearly bigoted, Beck’s comments appeared to have the joking tone of a self-described “rodeo clown.” But Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) was not joking when he took to the House floor Wednesday to warn that voting for “the Affirmative Action Amnesty Act,” as he dubbed DREAM, will “relegate the position of non-minorityAmerican citizens to behind those who are now in this country illegally.”

Appearing on Radio America with Greg Corombus yesterday, Rohrabacher expanded on the dangers to white people of DREAM, explaining that the “real zinger” is that it puts minorities “ahead of every American child who’s not a minority.” “[T]hey can get into college before our kids,” Rohrabacher said on behalf of white people everywhere, warning ominously at the end of the interview that “if Americans aren’t alerted to this, we’re going to lose our freedom”:

ROHRABACHER: And one thing that people don’t talk, and this is the real zinger. … So they go to college, they finish, they get their legal status.Well, if that person happens to be a minority, which many, as we know, illegal aliens are Hispanic in background and other minorities, they then are immediately eligible to all the preferences we have written into our laws.

So we’re not only putting them in the line, so to speak, but we’re putting them ahead of every American child who’s not a minority. You put them at the front of the line for government education program, for jobs, for all the other preferences that we’ve written into our law. This is outrageous! Not only are we paying them money, that should be going to our kids education, but we’re making it so they can get accepted to college before our kids can get into. [...]

Please alert the people, if Americans aren’t alerted to this, we’re going to lose our freedom and we know it’s in jeopardy right now.

Listen here:

Of course, the DREAM Act is not amnesty, nor is it affirmative action, and it is certainly not a measure to oppress white people. The bill extends conditional legal status for five years to young people who are upstanding citizens and in this country illegally by not fault of their own. It will also help enforce immigration laws, reduce the deficit, andstrengthen the military, but that doesn’t seem to matter to Rohrabacher or Beck.

Beck: ‘If You Are…A White American Citizen, You Are Pretty Much Toast’

By Ben Armbruster Yesterday, the House passed the DREAM Act which would provide a path to legalization to children of undocumented immigrants who enroll in college or serve in the military. Naturally, most Republicans opposed the measure. It’s “a nightmare for the American people,” said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX). “It insults American workers, American taxpayers and anyone who believes in the rule of law.” One GOP congressman even said it’s unfair to “non-minorities.” “So those voting for this so-called DREAM Act are voting to relegate the position of non-minority American citizens to behind those who are now in this country illegally,” said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA).

Glenn Beck picked up on this theme on his radio show today. Misreading the provisions of the bill entirely, a caller said, “I’m going to need to prove that I’m an illegal alien so I can qualify for the in-state tuition” (of course, current law allows an American citizen to qualify for in-state tuition). Beck — famous for calling President Obama “a racist” who has a hatred for white people — then told the caller that he might want to steal a Mexican’s identity because it’s hard being a white guy in America trying to go to college:

CALLER: I can just make up a Mexican ID number and that won’t be identity theft.

BECK: No it won’t, it won’t be identity theft. No it’s not identity theft. Definitely not. At least not here. In Mexico you’ll probably go to jail for all of this but not here. Well no wait a minute, are you white?

CALLER: I can be.

BECK: You can be. You don’t want to be. You don’t want to be because if you’re white or you’re an American citizen or a white American citizen, you’re pretty much toast.

Media Matters has the audio:

It’s unclear why anyone thinks the DREAM Act somehow disenfranchises American citizens, because nothing in the bill places undocumented children at an advantage over citizens. The bill the House passed yesterday is not amnesty; it places demands on those undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. with their parents and are thus here illegally through no fault of their own. The Hill provides some key details:

The House legislation extends conditional legal status for five years to those illegal aliens who:

• Were younger than 16 when they entered the country • Have lived in the U.S. for at least five years • Have a degree from a U.S. high school, or the equivalent

Beneficiaries can apply for an additional five years of conditional nonimmigrant status if they’ve completed at least two years of higher education or military service. Afterward, they could apply for permanent legal status.

As House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer put it, “The beneficiaries of the DREAM Act are the kind of Americans we want.”

REPORT: Fox Gave DREAM Act Opponents Far More Airtime Than Supporters

From Media Matters

According to a Media Matters analysis, Fox News gave guests who oppose the DREAM Act, a bill that would provide a path to legal status for certain immigrants who came to the United States as children, more than 40 minutes of airtime from November 23 through December 6 but only about 7 minutes to supporters during that same period.

Fox Gives DREAM Act Opponents More Than 40 Minutes Of Airtime Versus About Seven Minutes For Supporters

From Nov. 23 Through Dec. 1, Fox Gave DREAM Act Opponents More Than 40 Minutes Of Airtime Versus About Seven Minutes For Supporters. Media Matters examined Fox News' coverage of the DREAM Act during all programming from November 23 through December 6. Fox News gave at least 40 minutes and 41 seconds of airtime to DREAM Act opponents while giving at least six minutes and 53 seconds to DREAM Act supporters. At least three minutes and 18 seconds of airtime were given to guests expressing no clear position. Media Matters labeled guests expressing no clear position as "Neutral."

Guests expressing opposition to the bill outnumbered those supporting the bill 18 to five -- with four expressing no clear position.

On "Straight News" Programs, 94 Percent Of Airtime Given To Guests Who Opposed The Bill. Among the DREAM Act segments featuring guests on Fox's "straight news" programs, 94 percent of total coverage among the segments counted was negative. Twenty minutes and 19 seconds out of a total of 21 minutes and 38 seconds of "straight news" coverage counted by Media Matters were devoted to guests speaking against the bill. Only 52 seconds of coverage were given to a guest who supported the bill, and 27 seconds were given to guests who were neutral.

In total, six of the guests featured on news shows were against the bill while two supported it and one was neutral.

On Opinion Programs, 70 Percent Of Airtime Given To Guests Who Opposed The Bill. Among the DREAM Act segments featuring guests on Fox's opinion programs, 70 percent of total coverage among the segments counted, was negative. Twenty minutes and 22 seconds out of a total of 29 minutes and 14 seconds of opinion show coverage counted by Media Matters were devoted to guests against the bill. Only six minutes and one second of coverage featured guests speaking in favor of the bill while two minutes and 51 seconds featured guests who who were neutral.

In total, 12 of the guests featured on the opinion programs were against the bill while three supported it and two expressed no clear position.

Methodology

Media Matters identified segments on the DREAM Act by searching for the term "Dream" in a closed captioning transcript archive for all of Fox News' programming from November 23 through December 6. Guests who expressed opposition to the DREAM Act were labeled as against the bill while those expressing support for the DREAM Act were labeled as for the bill. Guests who did not clearly express a position for or against were labeled as neutral. Multiple guest panels were recorded by taking the total time of the segment and dividing by the number of guests. All shows that run from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. and from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. from Monday to Friday were identified as "news" programs in accordance with the schedule Fox gave The New York Times. All other shows were identified as "opinion" programs. The original data is located here. Media Matters calculated the amount of time for each segment using the following criteria:

• Segments featuring a simple interview between a single guest and a single host in which the DREAM Act was the only topic of conversation were timed from the beginning to the end of the segment, which included relevant questions or comments directed at the guest by the host.
• Segments featuring a simple interview between a single guest and a single host in which the DREAM Act was one of multiple topics of conversation were timed from the beginning of the first sentence mentioning or referencing the Act to the end of the last sentence referencing or mentioning the Act, which included relevant questions or comments directed at the guest by the host.

• Debates between two opposing viewpoints on the DREAM Act were timed from the beginning to the end of the segment. The time was split evenly between the two viewpoints, which included relevant questions or comments by the host.

• Panels featuring multiple guests who spoke consecutively on the DREAM Act were timed according to the amount of time each guest spoke, which included questions or comments directed at each guest by the host.

• Panels featuring multiple guests who spoke on multiple topics including the DREAM Act were timed from the beginning of the first sentence mentioning or referencing the Act to the end of the last sentence referencing or mentioning the Act, which included relevant questions or comments directed at them by the host.