Hagan on Immigration
State Sen. Kay Hagan, a Greensboro, is running to unseat Republican U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole, who has made immigration a big part of her campaign.
Today, Hagan did a round-table program with sheriffs in Raleigh about the 287(g) program, which gives local agencies the ability to ask prisoners if they're legal and start deportation proceedings.
For a story I wrote a few months ago, Hagan said:
Hagan said the federal government needed to ramp up its enforcement, both at the borders and ports of entry and in communities. She said the program allowing local sheriff s to enforce immigration laws - a program favored by Dole - should be replaced by more federal enforcement. And she said the needs of businesses in North Carolina that use seasonal workers need to be taken into account in whatever program is pursued.
Hagan backed off that skepticism a bit today, saying that 287(g) was fine, but it should be paid for by the federal government. Here's a video of her answer:
Comments (7)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
No matter what she talks about, Hagan is delusional if she thinks she can beat Dole.
Posted on May 28, 2008 8:12 AM
You have any polling data or other evidence to back that up, or are we just going with gut intinct here?
Posted on May 28, 2008 8:16 AM
Leaving the enforcement up to the feds has been very ineffective,ask any Sheriff in NC or Texas and Arizona.
We in North Carolina are going to have to find our own solutions to the illegal immigration problem, I said that in 2007 and I still believe it.
Since 1996, section 287(g) has been available to address the issue but it requires local funding primarily and could be viewed as another unfunded mandate, remember No Child Left Behind ?
That having been said,federal funds would be required to implement it.I think when choosing between Hagan or Dole we should know which is willing to pledge to work much harder for more of that federal funding for NC.
The burden will most likely be borne by the counties and supplemented by the ICE budget unless we elect a hard working Senator to Washington to secure that funding for us,we will pay the bill.
Currently when local law enforcement detain illegals they contact Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE), who will due to budget constraints, in cases of no known violent crime arrests or previous deportation will instruct LE to release them. Why would any Sheriff or Police Chief tie up valuable resources when they know how it will end.
It's a game of hot potato with people's lives,that is not acceptable to me.With an estimated 2008 population of up to 600,000 illegals we have a significant percentage of people here who do not exist on any formal role.
Yes, they receive some services they don't pay for but they are also reduced to 2nd class citizens by their inability to contribute to and become a productive member of society.We can right both wrongs with legislation.
If the federal government was serious about stemming the flow of illegals into North Carolina we would have seen the effects by now, we would have had a NC Immigration Court much sooner than late fall 2008 (projected completion).
The new court will make it easier, for people in N.C. wishing to immigrate to the U.S. legally. Prior to the opening of this court they had to travel to Atlanta to apply and attend hearings.
I say we lead by example and move ahead by working on legislation to address the problem here at home.
Posted on May 28, 2008 11:42 AM
Mark Binker is in the bag for Hagan, we'll be fighting this all the way to election day.
Posted on May 30, 2008 5:29 PM
What part of this puts me "in the bag?" The post is about a change in postion on Hagan's part. My comment above simply asks someone to justify the assertion they made in a comment.
Y'all are welcome to fight the me or the media or whatever it is you think you're fighting. But does asking for an actual fact or two to back up an assertion really amount to "being in the bag?"
Posted on May 30, 2008 5:40 PM
Someone's a little touchy ;-)
It's just typical N&R to cheerlead for someone either from the triad or having a connection to the triad, whether it be politics, business, sports, American Idol, etc. The "news" kind of falls to the wayside, if I had the desire I could publish a list of cases in which this has happened, and I'm only in my 20s.
Secondly, this paper is trying to catch the N&O as well as the CO in terms of its liberalism. Seriously, Thomas Friedman, Leonard Pitts, Maureen Dowd weekly, not to mention Rosemary Roberts and Ed Cone, while the only conservatives worth reading are Thomas Sowell and George Will, although I think Will is losing it.
Posted on May 30, 2008 6:13 PM
Not touchy, asking for facts.
I'm amazed I still have to do this, but: the editorial page is the editorial page. It publishes the columns it sees fit. You're talking to a news writer right now. The editorial department doesn't set my agenda. John Robinson, who is the editor of the paper does. So hauling out a bunch of columnists names doesn't really make your point.
As to your other points:
* We're neither touchy nor cheerleading. In fact, I'm waiting for someone on this thread to use a fact or quote to point out how we're cheerleading. Throwing out blind assertions isn't arguing.
* If you have a list, I invite you to publish it.
Folks, we'll take criticism. I get cussed almost every day, either on the phone or in person. After 10 years of doing this, it really doesn't hurt my feelings any.
But it would be nice said how we were "in the bag," or biased, or whatnot. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
Posted on May 30, 2008 7:41 PM