Duncan Hunter on Immigration
Republican Representative (CA-52)
Hispanic community does not agree with having open borders
Q: Four out of five Hispanics are either legal residents or American citizens. Many of them feel affected by the negative tone of the immigration debate. What would you do to curb this anti-Hispanic sentiment?
A: I represent a district in
San Diego that for many, many years is a majority Hispanic and two-to-one Democrat. You know what you do? You look people in the eye and you talk to them frankly. I would say this: I got more votes from the
Hispanic community--known as the guy who built the border fence--than anybody running for office. That means that the Hispanic community in the United States does not agree with the idea of having open borders.
They do agree with the idea of having order on the border and having a regulated system where this lady of freedom standing behind me, the Statue of Liberty, says: Come in, but follow the rules.
Source: 2007 Republican primary debate on Univision
Dec 9, 2007
Folks here illegally have to leave, to protect our jobs
Q: Is it even practical to try to send 12 million illegal immigrants all home?
A: Folks that are here illegally have to leave and let me tell you why. Today, if youíre a dry wall contractor and you play by the rules & pay $27/hour, you will be
constantly under-cut by contractors who use people who are here illegally. Thatís not fair to Americans who play by the rules. Thatís one reason you have, in certain areas, especially in the construction trades now, higher levels of unemployment.
Source: 2007 GOP Presidential Forum at Morgan State University
Sep 27, 2007
Rescind Bushís order allowing Mexican trucks on US roads
Q: Allowing Mexican trucks into our country brings unsafe equipment driven by people unable to communicate in English, read highway signs, or even know our laws. This creates a serious safety concern and undermines American jobs.
Bill Clinton successfully kept Mexican trucks off US highways. Will you rescind Pres. Bushís order to allow Mexican onto US roads?
Source: [Xref Tancredo] 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate
Sep 17, 2007
- HUCKABEE: Yes.
- TANCREDO: Yes.
- COX: Yes.
- BROWNBACK: Yes.
- PAUL: Yes.
- HUNTER: Yes.
- KEYES: Yes.
Complete fence, despite difficulties, because itís the law
Q: Your idea is to complete 854 miles of fence from California to Texas along our Southern border. But top Texas officials now say that doing so would infringe on the property rights of some of the ranchers and farmers in that area, and they also say
trying to maintain a fence in open desert would be impractical. What do you say to them?
Hereís what we tell them: Itís the law. And you know, I built that border fence in San Diego. And itís really two fences. Itís a double fence. Itís not that
scraggly little fence that they keep showing on CNN with people hopping over it. If you get over my fence, we sign you up for the Olympics immediately. Now, that fence is a double fence with a road in between, and it reduced the smuggling of people and
drugs in San Diego by 90%. And thatís the reason I wrote the law that extends it 854 miles across Arizona, New Mexico & Texas. Theyíve only done 17.9 miles. As president, I will complete all 854 miles in six months. Thatís my commitment. Itís the law.
Source: 2007 GOP debate at UNH, sponsored by Fox News
Sep 5, 2007
FactCheck: Only 9 miles of fence in San Diego after 11 years
Hunterís implication is highly misleading, that an 854-mile border fence would cut smuggling for the US like the San Diego fence did. For one thing, San Diegoís fence just shifted smuggling to other points. For another, only 9 of the 14 miles of the San
Diego fence have been completed since 1996. Lawsuits, logistical difficulties & other issues have tied the project up, so the notion that hundreds of miles of fencing could be finished in 6 months, as Hunter promises if heís elected, seems far-fetched.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2007 GOP debate at UNH
Sep 5, 2007
This administration has ďthe slowsĒ on border enforcement
This administration has a case of the slows on border enforcement. As long as youíve got a revolving door and you have no border, itís not just an immigration problem, itís a homeland security problem. We need to build the border fence. We need to have a
Border Patrol which is big enough to get the job done, and we need to be able to ask people when they want to come into America, knock on the front door, because the back door is going to be closed.
Source: 2007 Republican Debate in South Carolina
May 15, 2007
Keep rule barring immigrants from running for president
Q: Should we change our Constitution to allow men like Mel Martinez, born in Cuba, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, to stand here some night as candidates for president?
HUNTER: We havenít seen his endorsement yet. Thatís a no.
GILMORE: No, I want to amend this Constitution in a variety of different ways, and this would be not a good start to do it that way.
McCAIN: He and I have many similar attributes, so I have to seriously consider it.
Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC
May 3, 2007
I built the 854-mile border fence and it cut down crime
Q: Gov. Schwarzenegger has won the state twice by downplaying partisanship and taking centrist positions on the environment, immigration, abortion. Is that the way to win for Republicans?
A: You know, itís a way to win, but we need to win the right
way. In my town of San Diego, we build the border fence. When we built that fence, we had a border out of control, and we built that fence. And itís a double fence. Itís not that little scraggly fence you see on CNN with everybody getting over it.
We had massive murders on the border, massive illegal immigration, massive importation of drugs. I built that border fence. We brought down the smuggling of people and narcotics by more than 90%. I wrote that law that extends the San Diego fence for
854 miles across AZ, NM, & TX. One way to bring down crime in every state is to have an enforceable border. That means letís build that border fence. When people want to come into this country, letís ask them to knock on the front door.
Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC
May 3, 2007
FactCheck: 854-mile fence shifted crime more than cutting it
Hunter made some dramatic claims for a security fence erected at the busy border area south of San Diego, implying it would have similar effects once extended to the Gulf of Mexico. But he didnít tell the whole story. Hunter could be right about his
claim of a 90% reduction in smuggling at San Diego. But the fence proved much more expensive to build than predicted, and to a large extent it merely moved illegal border crossings eastward.
San Diegoís 14-mile fence was supposed to cost $14 million,
but the DHS estimates that by the time itís finished it will have cost $127 million to build. Litigation by environmentalists over the fedsí proposal to pour 5.5 million cubic feet of dirt into a valley to flatten the terrain caused major construction
Overall apprehensions in the San Diego sector declined by 76% after the fence was begun. Meanwhile, however, apprehensions increased in others sectors further east, most notably a 591% increase in the Tucson sector between 1992 and 2004.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library
May 3, 2007
Hinting at amnesty causes a rush to the border
Q: Bush said, ďWe cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border. And that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter or country to work on a temporary basis.Ē
Is the president right?
A: The presidentís wrong on that one, and Iíll tell you why. Every time the president sends out a message or Congress sends a message that thereís a real or perceived benefit, thereís something good to be had in
America if you come in illegally, you start a stampede for the border. And weíve seen that in the number of border arrests that happen every time the president makes a speech in which he even hints at amnesty.
It doesnít make any sense to have this thin line of border patrolmen and now the 6,000 National Guardsmen that the president has sent to the border protecting our border, and at the same time make political statements [that encourage illegal immigration]
Source: CNN Late Edition: 2007 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer
Feb 11, 2007
Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border.
Within 18 months, achieves operational control over U.S. land and maritime borders, including:
Defines "operational control" as the prevention of all unlawful U.S. entries, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, narcotics, and other contraband.
- systematic border surveillance through more effective use of personnel and technology; and
- physical infrastructure enhancements to prevent unlawful border entry
Proponents support voting YES because:
It is obvious there is no more defining issue in our Nation today than stopping illegal immigration. The most basic obligation of any government is to secure the Nation's borders. One issue in which there appears to be a consensus between the Senate and the House is on the issue of building a secure fence. So rather than wait until comprehensive legislation is enacted, we should move forward on targeted legislation which is effective and meaningful. The legislation today provides over 700 miles of
two-layered reinforced fencing, and for the rest of the border provides a virtual fence, via integrated surveillance technology.
Opponents support voting NO because:
Just to build the fence is going to cost us at least $7 billion. Where is the money coming from to pay for it? How much is it going to cost to maintain this 700-mile fence? Who is going to do it? This bill contains no funding.
This bill also ignores real enforcement measures, like hiring more Border Patrol personnel, and instead builds a Berlin Wall on our southern border. So long as employers need workers in this country, and while our immigration systems impede rather than facilitate timely access of willing workers to those opportunities, undocumented immigration will never be controlled.
Walls, barriers, and military patrols will only force those immigrants to utilize ever more dangerous routes and increase the number of people who die in search of an opportunity to feed and clothe their families.
Reference: Secure Fence Act;
Bill H R 6061
; vote number 2006-446
on Sep 14, 2006
Voted YES on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project.
Voting YES on this amendment supports the Minuteman Project, a group of volunteers who have taken on surveillance of the Mexican border for illegal immigrants. The amendment states that US funds will not be used to tell the Mexican government about the whereabouts of the Minuteman Project volunteers. Proponents of the Minuteman Project say that they are volunteer citizens doing what the federal government SHOULD be doing, but has failed to do. Opponents of the Minuteman Project say that they are vigilantes at best and anti-Mexican racists at worst. The amendment states:
None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide a foreign government information relating to the activities of an organized volunteer civilian action group, operating in the State of California, Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona, unless required by international treaty.
The amendment's sponsor said on its behalf:
Reference: Department of Homeland Security appropriations;
Bill HR 5441 Amendment 968
; vote number 2006-224
on Jun 6, 2006
- What this amendment does is it clarifies Congress' position on a Border Patrol
practice or a practice of the US Government that tips off illegal immigrants as to where citizen patrols may be located.
- As a response to the lawlessness along the Mexican border, a group has sprung up called the Minutemen Project, and the Minutemen Project is definitely not politically correct in Washington DC. However, they filled a void which the government was unable to fill.
- There are over 7,000 volunteers in the Minutemen organization, and their help has been productive and good.
- What my amendment does is simply says that the U.S. Government cannot tip off the Mexican officials as to where these folks are located. Plain and simple, nothing fancy about it. I am sure the Border Patrol will say, oh, no, we are not doing that, and yet one of the Web pages of the Secretary of Mexico had the information very explicit, and we just do not believe that is a good practice.
Voted YES on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment.
Vote to pass the bill that would require hospitals to gather and report information on possible illegal aliens before hospitals can be reimbursed for treating them. The bill would also make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention, unless the employer meets particular conditions for exemption. The bill would specify that hospitals aren't required to provide care to undocumented aliens if they can be transported to their home country without a significant chance of worsening their condition.
Reference: Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments;
Bill HR 3722
; vote number 2004-182
on May 20, 2004
Voted NO on extending Immigrant Residency rules.
Vote on motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill that would extend by four months a law allowing some immigrants to remain in the country while pursuing legal residency.
Reference: Motion sponsoerd by Gekas, R-PA;
; vote number 2001-127
on May 21, 2001
Voted NO on more immigrant visas for skilled workers.
Vote to pass a bill to increase the number of temporary visas granted to highly skilled workers from 65,000 to 115,000 by the year 2000.
Reference: Bill introduced by Smith, R-TX.;
Bill HR 3736
; vote number 1998-460
on Sep 24, 1998
Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration.
Hunter scores 100% by FAIR on immigration issues
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is a national, non-profit, public interest membership organization of concerned citizens united by their belief in the need for immigration reform. Founded in 1979, FAIR believes that the U.S. can and must have an immigration policy that is non-discriminatory and designed to serve the environmental, economic, and social needs of our country.
FAIR seeks to improve border security, to stop illegal immigration, and to promote immigration levels consistent with the national interestómore traditional rates of about 300,000 a year.
With more than 70,000 members nationwide, FAIR is a non-partisan group whose membership runs the gamut from liberal to conservative.
The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
Source: FAIR website 03n-FAIR on Dec 31, 2003
Rated 92% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.
Hunter scores 92% by USBC on immigration issues
OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 USBC scores as follows:
About USBC (from their website, www.usbc.org):
- 0%-30%: open-border stance (approx. 197 members)
- 30%-70%: mixed record on open borders (approx. 70 members)
- 70%-100%: sealed-border stance (approx. 202 members)
U.S. Border Control, founded in 1988, is a non-profit, tax-exempt, citizen's lobby. USBC is dedicated to ending illegal immigration by securing our nation's borders and reforming our immigration policies. USBC [works with] Congressmen to stop amnesty; seal our borders against terrorism and illegal immigration; and, preserve our nation's language, culture and American way of life for future generations.
Our organization accepts no financial support from any branch of government. All our support comes from concerned citizens who appreciate the work we are doing to seal our borders against drugs, disease, illegal migration and terrorism and wish to preserve our nation's language, culture and heritage for the next generations.
Source: USBC website 06n-USBC on Dec 31, 2006
Declared English the official language of the US.
Hunter co-sponsored declaring English the official language of the US
OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY:
Amends Federal law to declare English to be the official language of the US Government.
- Representatives of the Federal Government have an affirmative obligation to preserve and enhance the role of English as the official language of the Federal Government.
- Requires such representatives to conduct official business in English.
- Prohibits anyone from being denied Government services because he or she communicates in English.
- Requires that all officials conduct all naturalization ceremonies entirely in English.
- Declares that nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the preservation or use of Native Alaskan or Native American languages.
EXCERPTS FROM BILL:
The Congress finds and declares the following:
Source: English Language Empowerment Act (H.R.123) 99-HR0123 on Jan 6, 1999
- The US is comprised of individuals and groups from diverse ethnic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds.
- The US has benefited and continues to benefit from this rich diversity.
- The common thread binding individuals of differing backgrounds has been a common language.
- The Federal Government should maintain a language common to all people.
- English has historically been the common language and the language of opportunity in the US.
- The purpose of this title is to help immigrants better assimilate and take full advantage of opportunities in the US.
- By learning the English language, immigrants will be empowered with the language skills and literacy necessary to become responsible citizens and productive workers in the US.
- The use of a single common language in conducting official business of the Federal Government will promote efficiency and fairness.
- English should be recognized in law as the language of official business of the Federal Government.
- Any monetary savings derived from the enactment of this title should be used for the teaching of the English language to non-English-speaking immigrants.
Other candidates on Immigration:
Duncan Hunter on other issues:
in 110th Congress:
in 111th Congress:
in 111th Congress:
Page last updated: Oct 17, 2009