Thread: Flake: Immigration: ‘I don’t blame the states

July 20, 2007
Immigration: ‘I don’t blame the states

By Tasya Grabenstein, tasya.grabenstein@azcapitoltimes.com


Flake says he will run again in 2008 for the 6th District House seat.
Lawmakers at the federal and state level say with 2008 being a presidential election year, immigration will not be taken up until 2009 or later. Gridlock on the subject in Washington has resulted in many states, including Arizona, taking the matter into their own hands by enacting legislation.

Gov. Janet Napolitano on July 2 signed what is being called the toughest employer sanctions law in the country. It penalizes Arizona employers for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants by suspending and threatening to permanently revoke their license to do business in the state.

Arizona Capitol Times spoke with GOP Congressman Jeff Flake by telephone from Washington, D.C. last week to get his take on why the bill failed in the U.S. Senate and what the chances are of his bill, the STRIVE Act, succeeding in the House. Sounding defeated and deflated on the issue, this is what he had to say.

What are the chances for the bill you’re cosponsoring, the STRIVE Act, now that the Senate bill is dead? Does your bill have a prayer of passage?

Not a prayer. No, I just don’t see the Democrats wanting to take it up. I mean with the Senate bill dead I just don’t think there’s going to be any serious comprehensive legislation to move. There may be some political statement legislation or some single elements go through…maybe [agriculture] jobs or something, but I just don’t see comprehensive reform moving at all.

So is there anything going on behind the scenes with your bill?

Nope. Frankly, no. We were having pretty regular meetings before the Senate bill collapsed to try to see what we could do here in the House, but….

It kind of took the wind out of your sails, huh?

Oh, yeah, definitely. I just don’t see anybody seriously considering it now.

Have you met with any of the senators or [President] Bush on the bill?

Not since it died in the Senate.

Will you take any action with the bill? Will it go to the floor?

Well, I mean it’s there. The Democrats control the schedule. So, it’s really up to Democratic leadership. I’d like to be optimistic that something would move through, but I’m not. I don’t know how the Democrats think they would benefit. All along they were saying there would have to be considerable public participation and I just don’t see where they think politically they would benefit by moving the bill through.

What do you make of the scuttlebutt that [Congressman John] Shadegg thwarted the Senate bill?

I’ll leave that to him. He knows more about it.

Opponents are saying talk radio played a large part in the defeat of the Senate bill. Do you agree?

Oh, sure, sure. You bet. There were warrants with the Senate bill obviously. I think that we would have been better off correcting those warrants in the House than the conference. I just think the status quo should be unacceptable to everyone. Now we’re stuck with the status quo for a couple of years.

[Sen. John] McCain said states will now enact their own laws, and that will result in a lot of conflicting laws and a real mess. How do you feel about that?

Yeah, it will. There’s going to be kind of a patchwork out there. But having said that, I understand the frustration at the state level and I don’t blame the states for wanting to move ahead to do what they can because we, at the federal level, seem incapable of doing it. So I think it’s inevitable the states are going to move ahead, but it’s very difficult when the federal government controls the border and it controls most aspects of labor law. It makes it difficult.

What’s your opinion of the immigration laws Arizona has passed, in particular, the employers sanctions bill that Napolitano just signed?

You know I have to plead. We’ve been kind of busy back here this summer and I haven’t had a chance to really look and see what the bill does.

You were on Fox News on Saturday and they asked you if it would be found unconstitutional and you said you thought it wouldn’t be.

No, I don’t think it will be. The states, you know, they…it’s got to be frustrating at the state level waiting for the federal government to move. I don’t blame the states for wanting to move ahead.

Your uncle [Arizona Senator] Jake [Flake] says he now regrets voting for employer sanctions. What’s your reaction to that?

I don’t know enough about what the state legislation they ultimately passed to pass judgment on it, but Jake’s a wise guy.

Have you talked to him about it?

Not since it passed. I have over time talked about it. I do agree with McCain that it’s going to be very difficult. When you rely on federal programs like Basic Pilot, that can — with some accuracy — tell you with Social Security numbers, but can’t really tell you if it’s been used a few hundred times. So there are very real problems there.

So the Basic Pilot program — do you think that needs revamping?

Oh yes. There needs to be a new system altogether. That’s why we proposed in our legislation a new employment verification system that has the biometric card that’s tamper proof. So, no, most definitely we have to move beyond Basic Pilot.

Senator Kyl was the subject of criticism from conservatives on the immigration bill. Have you come under any criticism for your co-sponsoring of the House bill?

No, no new criticism. From my very first race I said we need comprehensive reform. I tell you, I’ve always admired Jon Kyl. I’ve never admired him so much as I have lately — to see him tackle this issue and actually try to strike a good bargain. There were parts of the Senate bill I didn’t like, parts I think could have been fixed. However, the basic principles that Kyl was able to get…the concessions he got were substantial and I don’t think have been fully appreciated.

I’m sure you probably wish the issue would have started in the House as opposed to the Senate. Would it have been different?

I don’t know. It’s anybody’s guess. Obviously, there is a lot of well-placed mistrust in the federal government’s ability to manage something this big given our inability to adequately police the border and to enforce some of the laws on the books. It’s very difficult. You’ve got to have realistic laws in force. Part of the problem is that in 1986 we legalized those who were here illegally and we, I guess, assumed or didn’t have the political will to acknowledge that we would need additional workers. So we didn’t have a guest worker plan moving forward in ’86. All of a sudden we realized that we need more labor and we don’t have sufficient legal channels for them to come. That’s the problem with not doing comprehensive reform. Unless you have all elements of reform — border security, border enforcement — some mechanism to deal with those who are here illegally and a temporary worker program moving forward…the absence of any of those elements I think doom it to failure.

Moving away from immigration-related questions…Are you in favor of withdrawing troops from Iraq before the end of the year?

No. I’m waiting to hear what the generals have to say. Obviously, as soon as possible, we need to get the best situation we can. I think the commander in chief is in a better position still than we are in the Congress in determining that end.

http://www.azcapitoltimes.com/story.cfm?id=5695#

Jeff Flake needs to go.Big open boarders guy.

Sounds like Uncle Jake isn't much better!!!!

Well, well, well......I guess we'll just have to flick some Flakes out of their jobs and into the UE line.

Get rid of Flake