Skip to comments.El Paso Dems Question Reyes [Texas U.S. Democrat Rep. on border security with online survey]
Posted on 02/09/2006 12:34:32 PM PST by SwinneySwitch
Reyes Testimony Stirs Concern For EP Dems
February 8, 2005 -- El Paso County Democrats say they are in disbelief after watching the testimony of U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes before the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Investigations.
"What he was saying doesn't make any sense," said Carmen Duarte, County Chair for the Democratic Party in El Paso.
Duarte says they are concerned Congressman Reyes is downplaying the seriousness of border incursions, including the January 23rd incident in Hudspeth County where Hudspeth Sheriff deputies were at a stand-off with Mexican militants during a drug smuggling operation along the Rio Grande.
"He wasn't there when it happened. He didn't see. The Sheriff's did," Duarte told KFOX.
Democrats also can't believe Reyes is questioning testimony from the Texas Border Sheriffs Coalition - including El Paso County Sheriff Leo Samaniego and Hudspeth County Sheriff Arvin West - that the Mexican militants were armed with high-powered 50-caliber machine gun.
"Instead of criticizing them (the Sheriff's), he (Reyes) should support them because if someone gets killed that's going to create problems," said Duarte.
Do you agree with Rep. Reyes, or with Sheriff's Samaniego and West?
Choice Votes Percentage of 896 Votes
Rep. Reyes 85 9%
Sheriff's Samaniego and West 811 91%
Border Survey Ping!
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off this South Texas/Mexico ping list.
Couldn't vote. Server slammed so soon?
Do you agree with Rep. Reyes, or with Sheriff's Samaniego and West?
Choice Votes Percentage of 904 Votes
Rep. Reyes 86 10%
Sheriff's Samaniego and West 818 90%
Ah, there we go.
If any RAT has sense it's a Texas one.
"If any RAT has sense it's a Texas one."
I'm agreeing with the El Paso Dems looks like Rep.Reyes is the RAT!
There is definately some sort of conspiracy going on. The damn Admin. had better start leveling with the voters in border states real quick before We start taking matters into our own hands!
El Paso County Sheriff Leo Samaniego questions whose side U.S. Representative Silvestre Reyes (D) El Paso, is on.
Rep. Reyes addressed members of a Congressional subcommittee in Washington on Tuesday, following testimony by border Sheriff's, including Samaniego and Hudspeth County Sheriff Arvin West. The Sheriff's believe incursions along the border are frequent, and getting more dangerous. And they believe the Mexican military is involved - particularly in the January 23rd incursion in Hudspeth County in which drug smugglers were rescued by heavily armed men who crossed the Rio Grande to help them return to Mexico.
Representative Reyes believes that Deputies may be sensationalizing their accounts of the incursions, and that it's dangerous to draw conclusions before a full investigation is completed.
Sheriff Samaniego had to leave Tuesday's hearing before listening to all of Rep. Reyes' statements.
On Wednesday, KFOX's Ben Swann showed the Congressman's testimony to Samaniego in our Washington, DC Bureau. The Sheriff was stunned.
"For a glimpse there he sounded more like a member of the Mexican government, rather than the American government," said Samaniego.
On Tuesday, Reyes told KFOX that he's concerned about how the facts are being presented. "I think that maybe there are some agendas working here," Reyes told us. "And that's why we need to be very clear about what happened, how it happened, who was involved and where we need to go from here."
Samaniego replied to that saying "I don't need to make a bigger deal out of something, other than what it is. I think it's big enough."
KFOX also asked the Sheriff about Reyes' comments that the Deputies who were involved in the Jan. 23 incident in Hudspeth County were wrong about the type of weapons they encountered.
A Deputy Sheriff testified that he saw a Mexican military Humvee with a 50-caliber weapon mounted on the back on U.S. soil. Reyes testified that he could understand in the heat of the moment someone could make a mistake, but that his own Army experience made him question the Deputy's claim that such a powerful weapon could be on the vehicle.
"He's (the deputy) a Marine, a Marine Corps veteran," said Samaniego. "He (Reyes) made it sound like the guy doesn't know what the heck he is talking about."
Also on Wednesday, the border sheriffs' briefed White House officials on the recent incursions. They tell KFOX that they felt it was a good meeting and that the White House was interested in the information they provided.
Yup, Reyes is going on my Un-American Activities Committee list of suspected traitors. If Congress ever cranks that much-needed body back up...
When Reyes was first elected, it was expected he would be one of the (few) more common-sense Democrats and practical individuals on border issues. He has morphed into one of the dimmest bulbs and astonishingly ignorant members of the Texas delegation (on par with General Jackson-Lee), I believe it is not accidental, but quite deliberate. I would definitely say, where this man is concerned, "follow the money." And you know what I mean by that.
On the other hand we have to depend on those states to do what they can to guard national security while the Federal government pretends all is peachy - many of it's agencies operate as if continuing invasion is inevitable and shape their policies to accommodate the invaders at our inconvenience. OSHA, HUDD, SSA, COC and many more have programs and policies that protect illegal aliens and rain grief on citizens who disagree.
Of course, don't we have the brilliant policy of providing drivers licenses to illegals in our great state ?
I was thinking, too, that many of us had high hopes for Mexico President Vicente Fox in the early going, addressing so many of the problems in his country, but little did we know he'd "improve" Mexico by sending its most impoverished "North of the Border." This disaster could grow even worse if the Communist candidate for President, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, wins this July.
"When Reyes was first elected, it was expected he would be one of the (few) more common-sense Democrats and practical individuals on border issues."
I think even if we had gotten Ortiz in in '94, he likely would've fallen in '96 (something on par with Steve Stockman). Coleman faced his greatest danger of losing in '92, when he won by only 4,900 votes, over Republican newscaster Chip Taberski (that because he was one of those caught up in the check-kiting scandal - and Coleman had to drastically outspend Taberski to hold the seat). Same with Taberski, he probably would've only held it a cycle or two and would've fallen to Reyes. The seat was really too Democrat to attempt to gain or hold (it had gone for Dukakis over Bush, Sr., and Bush, Sr. only got 1/3rd of the vote there in '92).
If El Paso was split exactly in two (population-wise) they could create two districts extending north that would be over 55% Hispanic but would have given President Bush solid majorities in 2000 and 2004. But Texas Republican redistricters didn't have any interest in creatinmg districts for Hispanic Republicans.
Actually, the district did elect a Republican once (Ed Foreman in 1962), and was represented by a conservative Democrat (Richard White) for many years.
Reyes was expected to be a moderate, sometimes conservative, Democrat. In fact, he was attacked as a DINO in the primary (against a longtime Coleman staffer).
Apparently, Reyes has been co-opted by his party's caucus in D.C.
Then there's the License Plate issue. Seems we have just as many aliens swarming here now as when we were issuing them licenses. They come to get the "Not an ID" card and use it to obtain a shiny new Tennessee plate to take back to their state of operation. It's so bad that South Carolina's Highway Patrol reports that almost every accident involving an illegal alien during the past year found them having Tennessee plates on their vehicle.
It seems like those would be mighty convoluted districts in order to achieve the goal of getting 2 Bush-majority Hispanic districts based out of El Paso County (I know Dubya lost El Paso County by over 20k in '04 -- I believe he only carried it once, when he ran for reelection as Governor in '98, but never as President). You and I, of course, both remain chagrined at the TX GOP's failure to create these necessary (for maintaining our majorities for the future) Hispanic/GOP districts.
Bonilla's 23rd (as of 2004 election)
Yes, it would be mighty convoluted districts. But drawing geographically compact districts in South Texas yields districts with far, far fewer voters than in the rest of Texas, given that so many Hispanics are non-citizens or otherwise non-voters. At some point, the one-man, one-vote standard will have to be rethought in order for districts not only to have relatively equal populations, but also relatively equal numbers of voters, since otherwise we face a new kind of "rotten borough" problem. Currently, votes in most Hispanic-majority districts are worth a lot more than in Anglo-majority districts because only like 120,000 people vote in 70%-Hispanic CDs while over 300,000 people vote in Anglo-majority CDs. If we drew 55%-Hispanic CDs that took in areas far from the border, then every CD would have over 200,000 voters.
Well, at this point, I don't particularly care if the districts are as ludicrous-looking as humanly imaginable if it preserves our majority (hey, fair is fair, the 'Rats have been pulling this schtick since MA Gov. Elbridge Gerry decided to screw our GOP ancestral party, the Federalists, out of their rightful majority 200 years ago). The only problem, however, is if it passes muster at Justice. Where Caucasian voters are concerned, we can get screwed six ways to Sunday, but try a similar vein of splitting apart, packing or unpacking non-Caucasians, and they put the kibosh on that.
I tend to agree that districts ought to be drawn on the basis solely of those that are legal citizens (it would be a bit more touchy with ones that are legal, but are not voting in as high percentages, after all -- it's not a crime not to vote, and in some of those areas, given where they likely get their news from, perhaps it's not such a bad thing). Of course, you have that same situation here in TN at the legislative level, where Republicans get the highest numbers of overall votes in certain districts and Democrats the fewest overall, and yet, the Democrats still retain the majority (hopefully we'll flip that come this November to match the Senate GOP majority), which I've only mentioned about a few thousand times on here and elsewhere... *sigh*