Thread: Administration Accused of Witholding Info on Immigration

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/dulut ... 007986.htm

Administration accused of withholding information on immigration

BY MICHELLE MITTELSTADT
The Dallas Morning News
June 28, 2005

WASHINGTON - (KRT) - After President Bush unveiled his guest worker proposal last year, U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials were ordered not to discuss a surge in apprehension of migrants trying to enter the country illegally.

"Do not talk about amnesty, increase in apprehensions, or give comparisons of past immigration reform proposals," said the one-page Customs and Border Protection public affairs guidance, "White House Approved Talking Points Temporary Worker Program."

"Do not provide statistics on apprehension spikes or past amnesty data," the memo said.

The head of the conservative watchdog group that sued to obtain the memo, charged Tuesday that the Bush administration sought to suppress information indicating that talk of the guest worker plan spurred new illegal immigration.

"This administration improperly withheld information it knew would be embarrassing," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said at a Capitol Hill news conference. He was joined by Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., a critic of the plan. "That's a political sort of spin they are trying to do," Tancredo said, accusing the administration of stonewalling him on other requests for information about immigration enforcement. "It's abhorrent and I think they have to be called out on it."

Customs and Border Protection Assistant Commissioner Kristi Clemens denied that there had been any effort to downplay apprehensions. The guidance was issued, she said, after Border Patrol questions posed to detained migrants were leaked to a reporter.

"The issue at the time was that our line of questioning was compromised, and we did not want it clouded or any future line of questioning clouded by any other discussion," she said. "Securing the border to us is a national security issue. It's not political.

"This guidance ... was basically telling our field folks again, `Just stick with what we know. We are a law enforcement agency. Don't speculate,'" she said.

Documents obtained by Judicial Watch reflect that Border Patrol questioning - asking whether the migrants were motivated to make an illegal crossing because of rumors of a Bush administration amnesty - began the day Bush announced his guest worker proposal and ended mid-stream 20 days later.

The conclusions were never released. The White House insists the Bush plan, which would provide temporary legal status to many of the estimated 11 million to 12 million people here illegally, is not an amnesty.

An e-mail obtained by Judicial Watch, titled "Casa Blanca (White House in Spanish) additional info" said 1,711 questionnaires had been completed - 38 percent of which were viewed as "positive" for the administration. The term positive was not defined.

The White House played no role in initiating or terminating the questionnaire, Clemens said, adding that the Border Patrol frequently asks apprehended migrants about their reasons for attempting to enter the United States.

Judicial Watch, which filed suit last year to obtain the surveys, has received only 882 to date. Of those examined, it said:

_45 percent said they crossed illegally based on rumors of an amnesty.

_80 percent said they wanted to apply for amnesty.

_66 percent hoped to petition for family members to join them in the United States.

Clemens and other Customs and Border Protection officials rejected the Judicial Watch conclusions, saying they were based on incomplete, inconclusive findings. She noted that the spike in apprehensions began before Bush's guest worker announcement, and that at the time federal officials were unclear about the reasons for the surge.

She declined to discuss any subsequent Border Patrol findings on any linkage between rising illegal crossings and talk of a guest worker program, saying the information is law enforcement sensitive.

But Fitton said the public deserves to have the information at a time when policy-makers are weighing significant change to immigration law.

"We can have discussions and disagreements over how the president's proposal was interpreted, but I think we would all agree this is important information that we need to have as we engage in this debate," he said.

"The issue at the time was that our line of questioning was compromised, and we did not want it clouded or any future line of questioning clouded by any other discussion," she said. "Securing the border to us is a national security issue. It's not political.

May I ask: What coconut tree did she just fall out of? What turnip truck did she just roll out of? What boat did she just arrive on?

HONEY: EVERYTHING YOU DO IN THE UNITED STATES ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS: POLITICAL. YOU WORK FOR US, WE'RE YOUR BOSS. What you want with regards to your line of questioning, is not for you to decide. We ask the questions. You give the answers.

But Fitton said the public deserves to have the information at a time when policy-makers are weighing significant change to immigration law.

The public deserves the information as soon as it exists. It is our information. We paid for it.

Not like it was a big secret....every American in the United States knew there was a surge after that stupid announcement....because we could them on the streets.