Immigration

Sterling T. Clifton on the Issues Here on this page I will be giving you a bullet list of basic beliefs I have on several issues that face us today. Each section will have a link to a page of a more detailed explanation.

Click on a topic » {| class="wiki_table" ! ! ! !

Vigilant Maintenance Of Our Sovereign Territory And Borders
I oppose any action that surrenders the moral, political or economic sovereignty of the United States and its people, and insist upon the immediate restoration of that sovereignty wherever it has been eroded.

We hence forth demand the immediate securing and continuous vigilant maintenance of our sovereign territory and borders. We oppose any private or governmental action that rewards illegal entry into the United States in any way, and demand speedy and full enforcement of our laws concerning all such activities.

Enforce existing laws against illegal immigration
Our country’s immigration policy should encourage legal immigration to be maintained, and illegal immigration to be stopped cold. The policy should be enforced through existing laws.

It’s a travesty when those who have abided by the law and become citizens through the proper means are considered no different than those who have not. If we start extending all the privileges of life and citizenship to people who are not citizens and who are not here legally, then we’re breaking down our own laws.

Immigration, yes; colonization, no: oppose guest workers
Immigration, yes; colonization, no: Until our political leaders put in place the tools and forces needed to control our borders, responsible and moral Americans should oppose any measures that would signal our acceptance of the de facto colonization of our country.

George Bush’s guest-worker proposal and the Senate’s amnesty bill are such measures. They may serve short-sighted business interests intent on cheapening the cost of labor in our economy, and they may serve the corrupt interests of Mexican and other foreign elites seeking to relieve the pressure created by their own policies of greedy exploitation, but they do not serve the common good. Serving the common good demands policies that give preference in immigration not just to workers seeking jobs and money, but to those who seek liberty and the responsibilities of citizenship.

You can’t have freedom in principle if you won’t defend it in fact! And if we let our borders collapse, the facts that support our freedom will be gone.

Control border first, or no other laws mater
''' Q: Is it even practical to try to send 12 million illegal immigrants all home? '''

Sterling T. Clifton: Well, I think, especially in this context, it’s important to remember a number of things. The border is a matter of security, first of all. And we have to make sure that we control it, or no laws we pass have any significance. People will still cross on their own terms. So the very first priority has to be to get back control.

Excessive multiculturalism weakens American culture
''' Q: Do you agree that the excessive use of multiculturalism is weakening the unique American culture that has historically shaped the identity of America, and will lead to a harmful balkanization and unnecessary divisions among the citizenry? '''

Sterling T. Clifton: Yes

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Rescind Bush’s order allowing Mexican trucks on US roads
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: Allowing Mexican trucks into our country brings unsafe equipment driven by people unable to communicate in English, read highway signs, or even know our laws. This creates a serious safety concern and undermines American jobs. Bill Clinton successfully kept Mexican trucks off US highways. Will you rescind Pres. Bush’s order to allow Mexican onto US roads? '''

Sterling T. Clifton: Yes. Unless we come up with some sort of US National driver's license for foreigners driving for offical reasons, and the driver of the said mexican truck legeally posses one of those, and his truck has been routinely checked at the border to ensure that it passes all us safety regulations.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Oppose amnesty & guest workers until unemployment under 5%
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: Will you oppose all plans for amnesty, path to citizenship, guest workers, and seasonal passes until the very high unemployment rate of our own minority youth has dropped to 5%? '''

Sterling T. Clifton: Yes

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Be aggressive in securing our borders
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The borders of the United States of America are currently neither open, closed, or secure. Open borders would allow foreign criminals and other threats to enter the our country unchecked. Pandering politicians guarantee access to public services for undocumented aliens, to the detriment of those who would enter to work productively, and increasing the taxpayers' burden.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Closed borders would be bad for America because it would violate the very ideals of our founding, and those stated on the Statue Of Liberty.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Secure borders are what we need. It allows all who are willing, to come to America to live, provided that they are here for the betterment of themselves and their families through building up America, and not to America's detriment.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Seal borders; no amnesty; no social services for illegals
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The time for rhetoric is over. We will seal our borders and ports. I support construction of a fence to secure our borders, but a Baldwin Administration will not wait for the construction of a fence in order to seal and secure our borders. We will utilize whatever force is necessary, including military personnel, to effectively secure our borders immediately.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">By sealing the borders and by cutting off the money supply to illegal aliens, the problem of illegal immigration would dry up. As it is, we have no idea how many potential terrorists have snuck (and are sneaking) through our borders.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">There will be no "path to citizenship" given to any illegal alien. That means no amnesty. Not in any shape, manner, or form. I would not allow tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens' education, social services, or medical care. As President, I would end birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. There would be no "anchor babies" during my administration.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">No path to citizenship for illegal aliens
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Not only does the Bush administration not secure our borders and ports, it wants to provide a "path to citizenship" for illegal aliens. It allows tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens' education, social services, and medical care. It offers birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. And it prosecutes and imprisons Border Patrol agents for shooting (but not seriously enough to prevent his escape back into Mexico) a known illegal alien and drug trafficker.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Cut off money supply & illegal immigration dries up
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">By sealing the borders and by cutting off the money supply to illegal aliens, the problem of illegal immigration would dry up. I would enforce our visa rules. This means anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates US law is immediately deported. There would be no "path to citizenship" given to any illegal alien. That means no amnesty. Not in any shape, manner, or form. I would not allow tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens' education, social services, or medical care.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">No wonder the flood of illegal aliens has skyrocketed since George W. Bush became President. And is there anyone who does not understand that a John McCain Presidency will be more of the McSame? A McCain White House promises continued open borders and ports. Plus, McCain will also pus forward with his plans to grant amnesty to illegal aliens. When it comes to illegal immigration, amnesty, etc., there will be no relief from an Obama White House. Both Barack Obama and John McCain are pro-open borders, pro-amnesty twins.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">End birthright citizenship for illegals; no more anchor babies
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">As President, I would end birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. There would be no "anchor babies" during my administration. What I mean by this is that no one born here to parents that are here illegally, would qualify as citizen by birth.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Special status for illegals disrespects legal immigrants
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: The majority are in favor of granting legal status to undocumented aliens if they meet certain criteria. If the majority supports that, why not support that idea? '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: Because we have to enforce our borders, and we have to uphold the law. There are millions of people who have stood in line in US embassies around the world, waiting to become American citizens, waiting to become legal residents of the US. But when they finally come here, and when they are joined by those people in Latin America who have often fought tyranny, who have fought against the Castro regime, who have come here and risked their lives to become US citizens, when all those people come here, they become a part of us; they become a part of our family. It would disrespect them if we said other people who had not obeyed the law and had not gone through the process, to set them above them and to give them special status above those who have obeyed the law and fought so hard to become good American citizens and legal residents.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Pledges to veto any immigration bill that involves amnesty
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: Will you pledge tonight, if elected president, to veto any immigration bill that involves amnesty for those that have come here illegally? '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: Yes, I pledge that. A nation that cannot and will not defend its own borders will not forever remain a sovereign nation. And it’s unfair to all of those who've waited and done everything right to come here legally.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Secure our borders and end “sanctuary cities”
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The United States is a nation of immigrants. Throughout our history, legal immigrants have brought energy, ideas, strength, and diversity to our country, our economy, and our culture. This must continue. But in the post-9/11 world, immigration is more of a national security issue. A government that cannot secure its borders and determine who may enter and who may not, abrogates a fundamental responsibility. I am committed to:
 * Securing our borders and enforcing immigration laws. Amnesty is not an option and the toleration of “sanctuary cities” must end. Any municipality who harbors illegals, or allows its sub-municipalities to do so will get ZERO Federal dollars as long as it continues.
 * Reviewing our immigration laws and policies to ensure they advance our national interests.
 * Uniting Americans by welcoming legal immigrants willing to learn English, assimilate into our communities, and become productive citizens.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Protecting our border is part of being a sovereign nation
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">When we look to Washington, we see a bureaucratized government that is increasingly unable or unwilling to carry out basic governmental functions, including the fundamental responsibility of securing our borders against illegal immigration and enforcing our laws. A nation that can’t protect its border will no longer be a sovereign nation.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Immigration in large part has to do with national security
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The immigration problem has to do with immigration, but it in large part has to do with national security. We live in a world now; we have inherited a world that is watching the attempted marriage between radical Islamic fundamentalism and nuclear technology. We live in a world where 40 countries have fissile materials sufficient to make a nuclear weapon, and the bad guys are trying their best to get their hands on it. And we live in a country with porous borders and porous ports, and it doesn’t take a genius to put all that together and see the problem that we’ve got in this country. And I think people are going to demand that we address that first. I don’t think the 12 million illegal aliens that are here are as much a concern a 12 million and the next 12 million on infinitum. We were told before that there was a solution to this if we would only pass a bill, but we did that in 1986 and now we’re coming back with the same old stuff.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Opposes amnesty in any form
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Thompson has made it clear that he opposes amnesty, in any form, and that securing our borders from a further flood of those who do not enter legally is essential to the security of the US: “As usual, we avoided the illegal-immigration problem for as long as we could. I think its time for a little plain talk to the leaders of Mexico. What does it say about the leadership of a country when that country’s economy and politics are dependent upon the exportation of its own citizens?”

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Illegal immigrants must go home and start over
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The people who are here would have to go to the back of the line and start over. It’s not to be cruel. It’s to make that everybody living in our boundaries lives in the light, not the darkness, and doesn’t run and hide every time they see a police car. We owe it not just to the people who have waited in line a long time, but also those who do want to live and work here, and create a system that is legal, that makes sense and actually protects our borders but protects the dignity & worth of every person.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Build a border fence within 18 months of taking office
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: In order to curb illegal immigration, do you support making changes in the law that would give citizenship only to children who are born to parents who are legally in this country at the time the child is born? '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: Of course, without hesitation. But this would require constitutional change. Since the Supreme Court as is would not uphold any federal law saying as much. The real issue is, that doesn’t fix the problem. What we’ve got to do is to have a secure border fence, something I have proposed that we do within 18 months of taking office. If we don’t have a secure fence and have just this open door that people can come in and out at will, we’re never going to deal with this issue effectively and responsibly. And today, many Americans are angry not that people want to come here -- and I’m going to say it again -- people in this country are grateful to God they’re in a land that people are trying to break into and not one they’re trying to break out of. So it’s not that we’re building a fence so we can keep our people in or keep people out, but that people who do come here would have to come legally.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Focus on demand: penalize employers of illegal immigrants
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I don’t believe the average American resents that people want to come here. We ought to thank God that we still live in a country that people are trying to break into, not one they’re trying to break out of. But you’ve got to have a secure border because otherwise our borders are not only open to illegal immigrants, but to somebody bringing a suitcase with a dirty bomb.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">But, more importantly, if we’re going to deal with the supply, you touch it at the point of the demand. And until something is done to touch the people who are employing illegal immigrants, to create what amounts to another version of slave labor, then we’re never going to stop the flow.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">You’re not going to get illegals to admit that they’re here illegally, because they’re desperate. What we have to do is to start putting the penalty on the people who are most benefiting from them, the employers who are using those laborers in order to keep from having to pay decent wages.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Deport the illegal immigrants who don’t do it the right way
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">When we say, “Well, we can’t round these people up and take them home,” we don’t have to. You give them the option: If you don’t do it the right way and then we catch you, you would be subject to deportation. But if you do it the right way, then you’re going to be able to live with your head up and live free in this country, properly. People can go back and start the process legally, for their benefit and for everyone else’s benefit.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Deport illegal immigrants in 90 days under the ideal setting
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: You said that for a lot of illegal immigrants who are here, under your plan, we could deport many of them within 90 days. How could we do it that quickly? '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: My plan is this, which is for those that have come here illegally and are here illegally today, no amnesty. Now, how do people return home? Under the ideal setting, at least in my view, you say to those who have just come in recently, we’re going to send you back home immediately, we’re not going to let you stay here. You just go back home. For those that have been here, let’s say, five years, and have kids in school, you allow kids to complete the school year, you allow people to make their arrangements, and allow them to return back home. Those that have been here a long time, with kids that have responsibilities here and so forth, you let stay enough time to organize their affairs and go home.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Mandatory prison term for employers who hire illegals
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: Would you be in favor of a mandatory prison term for any employer who hired an illegal immigrant? '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: Of course. Any employer who knowingly hires an illegal worker, immigrant or otherwise, should be punished severely because they are taking business away from other employers who follow the rules, and employment from workers who do the same. I say jail-time instead of financial punishments because most if not all of the Fortune 500 companies in America woudl be able to afford just about any fine we could levy against them. Jail-time guaruntees that no matter how big or rich the company, the employer is still punished.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Welcome the people who have been standing in line first
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: The majority are in favor of granting legal status to undocumented aliens if they meet certain criteria. If the majority supports that, why not support that idea? '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: You know, I have the occasion to talk to people who have loved ones that are hoping to come to this country, to be reunited with family members. And they’re staying in their home countries applying legally. I believe that those people ought to be the first ones to get to come to this country. Those who have come illegally, in my view, should be given the opportunity to get in line with everybody else, but there should be no special pathway for those that have come here illegally to jump ahead of the line or to be come permanent residents or citizens. They should be treated like everybody else who wants to come to this country. We’re going to protect legal immigration. At the same time, we’re going to enforce the law, show that we’re a nation of laws, and welcome the people who have been standing in line first.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Zero federal funding to sanctuary cities
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Any city, county or state that allows or encourages sanctuary cities of illegal immigration in any way, shape or form, shall have absolutely every federal dollar they currently receive, revoked until their behavior improves. If they misbehave again, the money shall be removed again. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">The States, and counties are highly encouraged to do the same with all principalities within their jurisdiction.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Make English national language
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Let me make it real clear; I’m not anti-immigrant. I love immigrants. I love legal immigrants coming to our country. The problem is that we have an extreme case of multiculturalism eroding away at our own culture and one of the easiest ways to curtail that would be to mandate that all official communications, publications and materials for local, state and federal governments, to be printed in English and <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">English  <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"> only. I would recommend each municipality have some translators on hand to assist people who are poor in <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">English  <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. This would apply to all parts of government, including all publication funded institutions, of learning or otherwise.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Under a Clifton administration, the US will because an immersion learning society. All people will be allowed and welcomed to speak whatever language they choose in their home and personal lives, whether it be Spanish, German, Arabic, ancient Egyptian, Hebrew, or Klingon. As long as they keep in mind, that when they go to school, or interact with any government or public agent, that is not the designated translator, they will need to communicate in <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">English  <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">. Furthermore, I would support local government owned and operated <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">English  <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"> teaching centers.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Furthermore, and language classes in schools should be taught in the same manner and structure as <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">English  <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"> is taught. That is to say, foreign language classes should not be required for graduation, and that they should be taught at the same level and structure as we teach <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">English, not just a translation class.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Unfair to allow all illegal immigrants to stay
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I disagree fundamentally with the idea that the 12 million people who’ve come here illegally should all be allowed to remain in the US permanently, potentially some of them applying for citizenship and becoming citizens, others just staying permanently. That is a form of amnesty, and that it’s not appropriate. We’re a nation of laws. Our liberty is based upon being a nation of laws. I would welcome those people to get in line with everybody else who wants to come here permanently. But there should be no special pathway to permanent residency or citizenship for those that have come here illegally. I welcome legal immigration. Of course we need to secure the border. We need to have an employment verification system with a card to identify who’s here legally and not legally. We need to have employer sanctions that hire people that then don’t have the legal card. But with regards to those already here, it is simply not right and unfair to say they’re going to all get to stay.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">If Necessary Amend Constitution to remove aliens’ birthright citizenship
''' <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Q: You say you’re a strict constructionist of the Constitution, and yet you want to amend the Constitution to say that children born here should not automatically be US citizens. '''

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Sterling T. Clifton: Well, that’s constitutional, to do it. Besides, it was the 14th Amendment. It wasn’t in the original Constitution. And there’s confusion on interpretation. In the early years, it was never interpreted that way, and it’s still confusing because individuals are supposed to have birthright citizenship if they’re under the jurisdiction of the government. And somebody who illegally comes in this country as a drug dealer, is he under the jurisdiction and their children deserve citizenship? I think it’s awfully, awfully confusing, and, matter of fact, I have a bill to change that as well as a Constitutional amendment to clarify it.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Immigration problem is consequence of welfare state
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">I see the immigration problem as a consequence of our welfare state. We encourage people not to work here, but the welfare we offer the people who come--they get free medical care. They get free education. They bankrupt our hospitals. Our hospitals are closing. And it shouldn’t be rewarded. That means you don’t give them citizenship. You can’t solve this problem until you get rid of the welfare state, because in a healthy economy, immigrants wouldn’t be a threat to us.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">We subsidize illegal immigration, so we get more
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">If you subsidize something, you get more of it. We subsidize illegal immigration, we reward it by easy citizenship, either birthright or amnesty. But we force our states and our local communities to pay for the health care and pay for the education. Why wouldn’t they bring their families? And because of our economic conditions, we do need workers. But if we had a truly free market economy, the illegal immigrants would not be the scapegoat.

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">End all incentives and amnesty for illegal immigrants
<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">We haven’t talked about the economics of illegal immigration. You can’t solve this problem as long as you have a runaway welfare state & excessive spending & the wiping out of the middle class through inflation, because that’s what directs the hostility, is people are hurting. When we have all these mandates on hospitals and on schools. There’s an incentive for a lot of our people not to work, because they can get welfare. Then there’s a lot of incentive because they know they’re going to get amnesty. We gave it to the illegals in the ‘80s. Then, we put mandates on the states to compel them to have medical care. And you say, well, that’s compassionate. What happens if the hospital closes and then the people here in this country don’t get medical care? So you can’t divorce it from the economics. You’ve got to get rid of the incentives. No amnesty. No forced benefits. It just won’t work if you try to see this in a vacuum. You have to deal with it as a whole, as an economic issue as well.
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }