Thread: Immigration as Issue Criticized

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=487624

Immigration as issue criticized
Democratic candidates share stances
By STACY FORSTER
sforster@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Aug. 24, 2006
The Democratic candidates for attorney general said Thursday that making illegal immigration an issue in the elections was a political move intended to create divisiveness.


Incumbent Peg Lautenschlager and challenger Kathleen Falk, the Dane County executive, speaking at a lunchtime forum sponsored by the Milwaukee Bar Association, sounded the same on some other issues, as well, such as a Nov. 7 advisory referendum on the death penalty. Both said the death penalty would be a costly drain on state resources.

Lautenschlager spent much of her time talking about her record of cracking down on Internet predators, enforcing public records and meetings laws, and sticking up for consumers, among other issues.

Falk stressed her experience as Dane County executive, saying it gave her the necessary management skills to balance the state Department of Justice's needs for law enforcement and resources.

Citing her experience as a district attorney and U.S. attorney, Lautenschlager questioned whether Falk had the necessary courtroom experience to be attorney general.

"I think that matters, particularly in the office of attorney general when you look at the primary functions of that office and the majority of work which the people in that office do," Lautenschlager said.

Falk pointed to her 14 years as an assistant attorney general handling civil and appellate work. She was critical of Lautenschlager for not getting a handle on the increase in DNA submissions to the State Crime Laboratory.

"That's not an excuse or justification for not solving the problem," Falk said.

On the question of the department's role in dealing with illegal immigration, Lautenschlager said the federal government should take the lead.

When the federal government does find a way to reform immigration policies, Lautenschlager said, she hopes "it doesn't do so in a way that creates racial divisiveness or divisiveness between rich and poor or any of the things we're seeing in this election year."

Falk said she supports modernizing immigration law but said the conversation that had been generated this year was "mean-spirited."

"We have seen this interjected in the attorney general's race not because it's a matter of law enforcement but really as a matter of dividing," Falk said. Republicans were "raising issues of racial tension that don't foster improving our state."

The state Department of Justice doesn't arrest undocumented immigrants who have not committed crimes but does take the lead in deporting those who become sex offenders, Lautenschlager said.

Falk said that residents picked up for crimes should be subject to normal deportation laws.

The two men seeking the Republican nomination for attorney general both were critical of the Democrats' approach.

Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher, speaking from a campaign function in Appleton, said the state should absolutely take a role in illegal immigration by deporting those who are caught committing crimes.

"Race has nothing to do with this," Bucher said. "They shouldn't be here, and at the conclusion of their sentences, they should be deported." He has also said that certain non-violent offenders could be deported before prosecution.

Former U.S Attorney J.B. Van Hollen criticized Bucher's idea of deporting illegal immigrants before conviction and the Democrats for what he called blurring the line between legal and illegal immigration.

"I don't have anything against immigrants," Van Hollen said in a statement. "I do, however, oppose those who break the law."

Van Hollen and Bucher will appear at a Milwaukee Bar Association forum Tuesday.

When the federal government does find a way to reform immigration policies, Lautenschlager said, she hopes "it doesn't do so in a way that creates racial divisiveness or divisiveness between rich and poor or any of the things we're seeing in this election year."

What does she mean by the statement, "between rich and poor"? Is that an inference to we average citizens and the businesses that want to hire illegal aliens?