×

Mitrano, Reed debate immigration opinions

Editor’s note: This is the second in a four-part series featuring a debate between Rep. Tom Reed and challenger Tracy Mitrano.

U.S. Rep. Tom Reed and Democratic challenger Tracy Mitrano agreed more about immigration reform and border security than they seemed to want to admit, both calling for secure borders and fair treatment of immigrants.

“We need a border that is secure and is functioning,” Reed, R-Corning, said during a debate last week.

Mitrano agreed, and asserted that claims she supports open borders are untrue. She noted how no developed nation has open borders and showed some moderation in how she would not call for the abolishment of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as some Democrats have offered in response to detention centers holding thousands of migrant children this year.

A technologically savvy border and a bipartisan path to citizenship was emphasized by both candidates, though the details sourced some debate.

“You can find common ground on this issue,” Reed said. “You can fundamentally find it.”

Coupled with the physical wall, Reed called for services that allow border agents to “make sure the border is functioning so that when people come, we know who they are, they’re properly vetted, and that they can come enjoy any opportunity or visit they want to do with America, and they can leave.”

Reed said he believes most immigrants, particularly those who provide seasonal employment on farms throughout the country, including Chautauqua County, want to go back home; therefore, documentation for these residents doesn’t have to provide permanent residence in the U.S. Reed also hopes that local farms won’t have to rely on a migrant labor supply in the future and would rather see the country’s labor supply grow through agricultural opportunities in schools to support farms that are struggling.

Mitrano criticized this claim, stating Reed would hold out on citizenship for those who work hard on American soil. Reed said that most of the immigrants he has talked to said they don’t want to live in the country.

Reed said a secure border would prevent illegal immigrants bringing more crime to the U.S. and killing citizens. He thinks the DREAM Act should at least be debated in order to discuss possible pathways to citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants.

Mitrano said Reed’s comments were a means to divert the issue, divide the country and disrespect the residents of the district.

“The only thing that is ludicrous is the suggestion that I believe in open borders,” Mitrano said. “I do not. I never have.”

Mitrano also brought up how Reed voted against comprehensive immigration reform in 2013 through the proposed Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act. Mitrano also said Reed has failed to deliver work visas for some dairy farmers who wanted them for annual or seasonal employment.

“He holds (the DREAM Act) hostage to the wall,” Mitrano said in reference to President Donald Trump’s proposed border wall.

In response, Reed said he is not holding DREAMers hostage but is working across the aisle with the Problem Solvers Caucus he co-chairs to pass bipartisan immigration reform that both sides can agree to.

The pair did agree that those who illegally moved here should receive some level of documentation if they’ve been here for a generation. Mitrano said she would want citizenship for those people who have worked and dedicated themselves to America but said she would be willing to compromise on that issue. As long as those residents aren’t deported, Mitrano said, she would be willing to work in a “bipartisan spirit” on the issue. Reed said he would never consider amnesty and would not support citizenship for anyone who entered the country illegally, citing that there should be consequences for those who break the law.

“We need intelligent border protection,” Mitrano said. “I absolutely agree with that.”

Reed criticized Mitrano’s attempts to sound bipartisan and claimed that she has evolved her views on immigration to seem more moderate since she won the primary election in June. Reed said he strives for bipartisan agreement in Congress that considers the perspectives supporting increased border security with a balance of how to provide documentation or citizenship for certain groups of immigrants in the country.

“I’m not interested in being in Washington in order to take a position that is in no way possible of getting into law,” Reed said. “I’m at the point now developing relationships in our position to recognize what will get to 218 (in the House) and what will get to 60 in the Senate.”

Mitrano pointed out that she agreed more so with what Reed proposed than he said she did. She mentioned how Reed said he thinks there should be documentation for people who have been here for years.

“That’s what I’m saying the kind of thing I would agree to,” Mitrano said. “It doesn’t have to be citizenship.”

Mitrano said Reed acts as a moderate but works as an “extremist” in practice. She said Reed says he wants common sense reform but does not act upon it yet.

“Tracy, you are patently false,” Reed argued. “And this is the problem with Washington, D.C. The rhetoric that you just attacked me with, the falsehoods and the characterization that you are attacking me with is just the problem with Washington.”

The remaining debate on immigration devolved into Reed calling Mitrano an “extremist” and Mitrano calling Reed the “Washington insider.” Both candidates argued that they are not extreme on their respective views.

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today