Thread: Immigration voting record of Tancredo vs. that of Ron Paul

Originally Posted by saveourcountry

THANK YOU! I've been wondering about Ron Paul.

Why isn't Tancredo more popular? I don't understand it.

Rep. Tancredo is going to do well in the Iowa straw poll that is being held in August. His popularity is growing.

Rep. Tancredo has no weak points with regard to his record of votes on legal and illegal immigration issues. If anyone claims that he has any weak points with regard to his votes on legal and illegal immigration issues, I would like for that person to point to a single vote that Rep. Tancredo has cast on immigration and illegal immigration issues in which he voted the wrong. I challenge anyone that believes Rep. Tancredo doesn't have a perfect record of votes on immigration and illegal immigration to name the vote or votes in which Rep. Tancredo voted the wrong on a vote involving immigration or illegal immigration.

Rep. Tancredo's record of votes on immigration and illegal immigration issues is PERFECT!

This thread had nothing to do with Duncan Hunter, however since a Duncan Hunter supporter found it necessary to say that "Tancredo has his problems too" and mention that he had " already drawn attention to a couple of them on a previous post", some further discussion of Duncan Hunter is appropriate.

Below is copied information from the NumbersUSA website about two (2) of Dunan Hunter's votes on the subject of immigration:

Tried to continue foreign nurse guestworker program in 1996
Rep. Hunter supported continuing a guestworker program for foreign nurses through his vote IN FAVOR of the Burr Amendment to H.R.2202. Those favoring the amendment said many rural areas had a shortage of nurses and needed the foreign workers. The 262-154 majority, however, let the foreign nurses program end, contending that there are more than enough Americans trained in nursing to do the job if the pay and working conditions are appropriate.


Voted in 1998 to allow firms to lay off Americans
to make room for foreign workers
Before the House passed the H-1B doubling bill (H.R.3736), Rep. Hunter had an opportunity to vote for a Watt Substitute bill that would have forbidden U.S. firms from using temporary foreign workers to replace Americans. Rep. Hunter opposed that protection. The substitute also would have required U.S. firms to check a box on a form attesting that they had first sought an American worker for the job. Rep. Hunter voted against that. The protections for American workers fell 33 votes short of passing.


I don't agree with bringing in more foreign guestworker nurses. I believe "that there are more than enough Americans trained in nursing to do the job if the pay and working conditions are appropriate".

I don't agree with Duncan Hunter's opposition to a bill that "would have forbidden U.S. firms from using temporary foreign workers to replace Americans". I would have voted in favor of American workers.

Tom Tancredo has received a grade of A every year that he has been in Congress from the National Taxpayers Union (NTU). Duncan Hunter's grades during that same time have been (beginning with 1999) have been B-, B, B+, C, C, C+, C+ and B. Here is a link to the NTU's rating webpage: http://www.ntu.org/main/misc.php?MiscID=13 .

Tom Tancredo has received a "Taxypayer Friend Award" for his votes in 1999, 2000, 2001, 20002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. The NTU has not yet listed the winners for 2006 votes if that award has been given for that year. That award is given to those congressmen that have demonstrated that they are "one of the strongest supporters of responsible tax and spending policies". Duncan Hunter has never won the award.

Below is a listing of Tom Tancredo's ratings. It comes from his presidential campaign website.

Voting Record
American Conservative Union A+
National Right to Life Committee A
National Rifle Association A
Family Research Council A
National Taxpayers Union A
Americans for Better Immigration A+
National Federation of
Independent Business A+

Rep. Tancredo was an original cosponsor of H.R.6061, the Secure Fence Act of 2006. He became a cosponsor of that legislation on September 13, 2006, the exact same day as Duncan Hunter. The legislation was sponsored by Rep. Peter King.

Rep. Tancredo voted against CAFTA.

Rep. Tancredo has a higher lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union than Duncan Hunter. Duncan Hunter has a lifetime rating of 92.0 from the American Conservative Union. Tom Tancredo has a lifetime rating of 97.8 from the American Conservative Union.

By the way, a "one trick pony" wouldn't have a lifetime rating of 97.8 from the American Consrvative Union. Rep. Tancredo has the highest rating from the American Conservative Union of any candidate seeking the presidency. Rep. Tancredo is the most conservative candidate in the race for the presidency.

You're starting to sound like a broken record, Tancredofan. I purposely didn't bring the problems up with Tancredo because I didn't feel it necessary to go there again (the man has issues whether you want to admit it or not). Actually, I'm going to be the stronger of the two of us and not bring his problems up again because we're doing a deservice to all three of the candidates by this biased bashing! Furthermore, there's a lot more to border security and illegal immigration than foreign workers. Okay, so Hunter isn't perfect (or wasn't ten years ago) in that category, however, he is far better than Tancredo in other areas outside of illegal immigration.

Border security and illegal immigration may be my #1 issue, but I'm not narrow-minded enough to believe it's the only issue facing our country today. Wake-up Tancredofan, foreign nurses is but a drop in the bucket compared to the problems we're facing. Personally, dealing with China is my #2 issue behind border security/illegal immigration and we both know Hunter is much better suited to deal with that issue! We also know who is best qualified to act as Commander-In-Chief for this country, and it's not Tancredo.

One last thing, the two votes of Hunter's you're talking about happened over 10 years ago. What if his position has changed since then? Have you bothered to find out or was it just easier to blast him for those votes. A lot of changes have taken place over the last ten years. Heck, I've changed my position of a few things over the last ten years, haven't you?

I didn't think it was fair of you to belittle Paul, that's why I invited myself into this argument. Even knowing what I do about Tancredo, I've still made him my second choice, while you on the other hand have publicly stated you would never vote on Hunter (based on two votes that happend over ten years ago). Someone here is operating with tunnel-vision, and I don't think it's me.

Oh, and by the way, I feel the reason you chose to attack Paul vice Hunter was because you knew there wasn't a lot of difference on the issue of border security and illegal immigration between Hunter and Tancredo. As much as it may hurt, you're going to have to live with the fact that some of us prefer Hunter and Paul as our number one choice for President of the United states.

Ostrich wrote:

I don't think that we should waste time debating who's the best candidate between Paul, Tancredo, and Hunter. All three are pretty good candidates, and probably the best shot that our country has at getting back to the basics. Let's concentrate on getting the word out about the positive things that these three have done, and concentrate on just how bad the mainstream Republican and Democratic candidates really are.

I agree, Ostrich. However, I wasn't going to let Tancredofan's attack on Paul go unanswered.

My choices remain: # Hunter, #2 Tancredo, ............#3 Paul.

Each of these candidates have strong points and weak points, yes even Tancredo. Just so happens though, all three of them are, as Ostrich said, our best bet to get this nation back on track.

Here is a link to a webpage on Rep. Tancredo's official website in which he explains his positions on a number of issues: http://www.teamtancredo.com/tancredo_issues_index.asp .

Thanks for the links--this one in particular had a lot of info. However, I don't care for sites like the American Conservative Union as I couldn't find anywhere on the site exactly how each Congressman was judged on the issues. All they said was, "Accordingly, our ratings encompass three general categories: (1) economic and budget matters; (2) social and cultural issues, and (3) defense and foreign policy." I don't always agree with the ACU anyway so that is no real help to me. As for the National Right to Life Committee, Tancredo, Hunter, and Paul are all against abortion, so that issue is a draw. And if you're going to bring up the NTU, Paul consistently ranks above Tancredo. But I don't let other organizations decide for me if a candidate is right for me, I decide for myself.

I am very impressed by Ron Paul's integrity and firm stand on the Constitution. I know if he voted against something I am in favor of, it was most likely that he felt it was not the federal government's job and/or was something that falls under the Tenth Amendment and should be left to the states. I know that Ron Paul will stand firmly for the Constitution and the sovereignty of the United States. All this NAU and SPP stuff will cease under Paul, and these represent the greatest threat to our nation. He will restore integrity to the presidency, something that is sorely needed.

I would respectfully say that I believe Rep. Tancredo has broader appeal than Rep. Paul. I believe he will do better than Rep. Paul in the straw poll in Iowa in August and will do better in the Iowa caucuses than Rep. Paul.

Tancredo may very well do better in Iowa, but I think Ron Paul would do better in the national election. He already has a broader base than Tancredo if you look on the internet.



I agree with MW that all 3 would be acceptable to me, but while I would vote for Tancredo or Hunter, I still think I prefer Paul. I will keep an open mind and keep looking at the issues and info that becomes available.

I must say, though, that I don't see how any constitutional principles can justify supporting on three (3) separate occasions the 245(i) amnesty program for illegal aliens. Two (2) of his votes on that issue were "yes" votes for the amnesty program. His other vote on that issue was a "no" vote with regard to a bill that supported the killing of the 245(i) amnesty program.

And I will be looking into this further. Thanks for all the info

The American Conserviative Union (ACU) does actually provide a list of how every member of Congress voted on each voted they scored and an explanation of each bill for which a vote was scored.

Here is a link to the 2005 scoring for House members that enables you to see how each House member voted in 2005 on the bills for which a vote was scored and an explanation of each those bills: http://www.acuratings.org/ratingsarchiv ... sehome.htm .

I don't let any organization decide my vote either. However, I do look at the votes that led organizations to rank members of Cognress and I do look at the rankings.

As far as the NTU, Tancredo has received an A from the NTU every year that he has been in Congress and has received the Taxpayer Friend Award from the NTU every year that he has been in Congress. Ron Paul has frequently been at the top or near the top of the NTU rankings. However, Tom Tancredo is very frequently ranked almost as high as Ron Paul among the 435 members of the House. In 2001, Paul ranked first and Tancredo ranked third. In 2002, Paul ranked first and Tancredo ranked fifth. In 2003, Paul ranked second and Tancredo tied for third. In 2005, Paul ranked second and Tancredo tied for third.

Ron Paul is a fiscal conservative. So is Tom Tancredo. I am disturbed, though, by Ron Paul voting for the Section 245(i) amnesties and for increases in increases in H-1B workers. I am also disturbed by his votes against the use of the United States military to assist the United States Border Patrol. If anyone receives an explanation about any of those votes, I would appreciate reading the explanation. Maybe there is a good explanation for his votes.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on who has broader appeal. I'm well aware of the performance of Ron Paul in internet polls. I guess we will just have to wait and see if his strength in internet polling translates into real votes.

Thanks.

What I like about Tom is the fact that he doesn't back down. He's not PC. He shoots straight from the hip - especially when it comes to Karl Rove and Jorge Bush.

He was the first candidate I ever heard a few years ago that is afraid for America if we don't get this right. And of course he warned us last year in his book "In Mortal Danger." If you haven't read this book yet, please do it soon. It explains everything you need to know about Tom and his positions.

Amazon is having a sale - now's the time to pick one up.

http://www.amazon.com/Mortal-Danger-Bat ... 152&sr=1-1