Sanctuary Cities and Our Republican Candidates

Cross posted by request from Beth, from Wake up America

[Update Below regarding the Newark, NJ. students that were executed]

One of the key advantages going into the 2008 elections that the Republican contenders will have, is their stance on illegal immigration as opposed to the those that are favored to win the democratic nomination for presidency.

By and large, the majority of the Republican candidates are firm on illegal immigration, enforcing our laws and securing our borders and that stance is more generally popular with the voting public as this latest Rasmussen poll is showing.

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters nationwide favor cutting off federal funds for “sanctuary cities” that offer protection to illegal immigrants. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 29% are opposed. Republican Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney proposed such a plan earlier this week.

By a 71% to 16% margin, voters also favor a proposal that would require all foreign visitors to carry a universal identification card as proposed by another GOP Presidential hopeful, Rudy Giuliani. Seventy-four percent (74%) also favor the creation and funding of a central database to track all foreign visitors in the United States.

By a 56% to 31% margin, voters want the government to continue building a fence along the Mexican border.

You can read Fred Thompson’s opinion about sanctuary cities over at Townhall.

If you listen to folks who oppose immigration and border enforcement, you get the feeling they think we put locks on our doors to keep everybody out. The truth is we have locks so we can choose who comes in.

An example of what happens when we don’t make the choice took place August 4th when three Newark, New Jersey, college students with great promise were executed, gangland style. The killers’ ringleader was apparently an illegal alien indicted twice in 2007 for felonies, including the rape of a kindergarten-aged girl.

Why would such a person be set free instead of being handed over to authorities for deportation? The answer is that Newark is a “sanctuary city” which bans cooperation between local officials and federal immigration officials. More than 60 sanctuary zones, including 30 of America’s largest cities, provide a national networked haven for foreign and organized criminals who recruit and operate outside those areas as well. These sanctuaries include Cambridge, Massachusetts; Los Angeles, California; Detroit, Michigan; Chicago, Illinois; Austin and Houston, Texas; Denver, Colorado; and New York City.

The consequences of “sanctuary cities” may be most obvious in the city that became the first in 1979 — Los Angeles. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, a confidential California Department of Justice study from the mid-1990’s showed then that at least 60 percent of the members of L.A.’s most violent gangs, with membership in the tens of thousands, were illegal aliens. Of all outstanding murder warrants in Los Angeles, 95 percent are for illegal aliens. Frustrated police say they are powerless to pick up even well-known, previously deported felons.

Read the rest…

Now, in case you do not realize how widespread the problem of sanctuary cities truly is, then take a look at a list of sanctuary cities across our country. (List updated 8/14/07)

Back to the Rasmussen poll:

A quick look at the opinions of Republican voters makes it easy to understand why Romney and Giuliani are so eager to engage on this issue. Seventy-three percent (73%) of GOP voters favor cutting off funds for sanctuary cities and 75% want the government to keep building the border fence. Eighty-one percent (81%) favor a universal identification card for foreign visitors and 88% of the GOP faithful support a central database to track all foreign visitors.

All cities that provide sanctuary to illegal aliens and those that are breaking our laws by being here illegally should have all funding for that city cut off, until they start abiding by the laws of our country.

No exceptions.

The Republican candidates should and will take advantage of this issue. The general public stood up, loud and clear during the immigration reform debacle and we soundly defeated it, showing that on this issue, the public holds more regard for those that will enforce our standing laws, build the fence, secure our borders and cut funding for sanctuary cities.

This is a major advantage fr the GOP party for 2008 and they should all make their positions clear and make sure to point out where Hillary Clinton, the favored democratic candidate for president, stands on this very issue. ( She voted FOR the immigration reform policy that would have granted amnesty to 12 million illegal immigrants)

They should point it out loudly and on a consistent basis, in case she, once again, changes her mind with the polls.

[Update] After reading this, if you do not agree, perhaps you should go try to answer those mourning the three students from Newark, NJ who were lined up against a wall, forced to kneel and executed with a shot to the brain, when those mourners ask “Why Did They Have To Die“?

%d bloggers like this: