Thread: Conservative immigration group pulls endorsement for Sessions, goes with Pierson

Conservative immigration group pulls endorsement for Sessions, goes with Pierson


By Nick Swartsell
nswartsell@dallasnews.com
2:05 pm on March 3, 2014 | Permalink

0

1

0

Rep. Pete Sessions and challenger Katrina Pierson

WASHINGTON– Conservative group Americans for Legal Immigration PAC has endorsed tea partier Katrina Pierson in the Republican primary run against Rep. Pete Sessions.
The group says Sessions, R-Dallas, supports legal amnesty for undocumented immigrants, while Pierson does not. Sessions’ campaign disputes that.
“Ironically, Ms. Pierson also believes in a guest worker program, as she has said numerous times,” said Sessions campaign spokesman Bruce Harvie. “Unfortunately for our opponent, this race will be decided by Texas voters, and not outside groups, and Texas voters stand with Pete.”
ALIPAC promotes tougher enforcement and opposes proposed reforms that would offer legal status or any path to citizenship for people in the country without permission. The group has supported Sessions in the past, but changed tack today due to a statements Sessions made last year.
“”Pete Sessions had a lot of people really fooled into thinking he was a supporter of America’s existing border and immigration laws,” said ALIPAC President William Gheen. “We were shocked to find out he is one of the Republican sellouts trying to change our existing laws to ‘accommodate’ and legalize millions of illegal aliens which would eventually permanently degrade America’s borders, laws, Constitution, and elections!”
ALIPAC had endorsed Sessions since 2006, citing his strong ratings with other conservative groups focused on immigration and past statements he’s made against amnesty.
In videos from town hall meetings held in 2013, Sessions is heard saying, ““I believe that my colleagues in the House have on a sheet of paper designed a system that would accommodate millions of people who are here for the right reasons, millions of people who today may be illegal—illegally here—but who would be handled fairly under a process.”
That process was drafted by House Republicans last year. It would create a guest-worker program in the United States, allowing immigrants to come and work in the country legally, without creating an automatic path to citizenship for them. Sessions said the program should not apply to immigrants with criminal records.
“Everyone with legal status isn’t necessarily a permanent resident,” Harvie told the conservative website Breitbart News on Saturday. “There are a number of visas, including work visas and seasonal visas that guarantee no permanent legal status, or citizenship, in the future.
“Pete is absolutely opposed to amnesty and he has worked hard to make sure we don’t give away legal status the way that the Senate did.”
But Pierson challenged the distinction.
“That’s amnesty, whatever euphemism Sessions wants to apply to it,” Pierson told Breitbart. She said that Sessions’ position as chair of the House Rules Committee makes his beliefs on immigration vitally important, as he helps decide what legislation makes it to the House floor. She contends that Speaker John Boehner and other GOP “establishment” leaders are working to push through amnesty.
Hardliners on immigration tend to label as “amnesty” any policy short of deportation, even if there are penalties, delays and assorted hoops.
“We are honored to stand with Mr. Gheen and ALIPAC against the GOP establishment’s efforts to push through amnesty,” Pierson said in a statement about the group’s endorsement.
This isn’t the second flare-up in a few days between Sessions and Pierson over immigration. Last week, Joe Arpaio, an Arizona sheriff whose turf includes Phoenix and who is known for his tough stance on immigration — announced and then quickly rescinded an endorsement for Pierson. He said she had “misled” him about about Sessions’ record, and switched his support to the incumbent.

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.c...-pierson.html/

My email to the author of this blog post...

Mr. Swartsell:

Thank you for your article about our endorsement of Katrina Pierson. I thought it was a fair article until I read the statement....

"Hardliners on immigration tend to label as “amnesty” any policy short of deportation, even if there are penalties, delays and assorted hoops."

I am assuming that you are the source of this opinion since it is not attributed?

Yes, the current laws do call for the deportation of illegal aliens and we oppose any change in law that would waive that current penalty as such a change would further undermine our already critical lack of enforcement credibility.

There are currently approximately 20 million illegal immigrants freely working and taking taxpayer resources in America with less than a 1% of a 1% chance of deportation and practically a suspension of all major laws designed to hinder them.

They have the backing of the most elite financial and political influences in the world including the US Chamber of Commerce, the upper echelons of both the Democratic and Republican Parties, most of the major banks, and a squadron of billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros, Rupert Murdoch, and Michael Bloomberg. These elites support the suspension of our existing border and immigration laws and that is exactly what is happening.

Most American citizens prefer the enforcement of our existing border and immigration laws and provision in the US Constitution that demands all states be protected from invasion.

Asking for adequate enforcement of our existing border and immigration laws as mandated by the US Constitution does not equate to your opinionated statement that " "Hardliners on immigration tend to label as “amnesty” any policy short of deportation"

And please tell me that you do know enough about illegal immigration to know that there is not any reasonable expectation that any promised "penalties, delays and assorted hoops" in exchange for legalized presence would ever come to fruition. Based on current lack of performance and lack of execution of our existing laws over the last 30 years since the last mass amnesty... why would you or anyone else believe promises of future enforcement?

No Mr. Swartsell, if Boehner and Obama are successful serving up amnesty for illegal aliens to their mutual financial masters, the only thing that will end will be any talk of feigned enforcement as 20 million illegal immigrants begin to dominate American politics, the next 20 million illegal aliens quickly enter the nation after being shown we have no enforcement credibility, and current American citizens endure the massive loss of live, jobs, and other quality of life degradations that will follow.

The position of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is that we want the existing border and immigration laws of America adequately enforced to establish enforcement credibility and to show that we can both deter and reduce illegal immigration and that is not a "hardliner" position. We are simply refusing to bow to the radical position being pushed on our nation by elites intent upon destroying an resistance Americans have to mass immigration or anything else for that matter.

While we would love to have you understand and better appreciate our true positions, at least please attribute your opinion statements inserted into articles as if they are uncontested facts.

Please feel free to contact me anytime if there is any question about our organization's actual positions on immigration issues and thank you again for tackling these contentious yet important issues.

Sincerely,

William Gheen
AMERICANS FOR LEGAL IMMIGRATION PAC
www.alipac.us
Post Office Box 30966, Raleigh, NC 27622-0966
Tel: (919) 787-6009 Toll Free: (866) 703-0864
FEC ID: C00405878

Cc: Katrina Pierson for Congress