Replies

"His stand on illegal immigration alone is enough to make me puke. "

The following is easier to read on the original Betterimmigration.com site.

Huck's stand was no worse than any of the other candidates, and in many cases much better. He was mostly criticised for allowing illegal immigrants to qualify for in-state tuition as long as they had met the residency requirements. I don't have a problem with that, but a lot of conservatives wanted to punish the illegals and make second class citizens out of them. I'm for sending them home but not for punishing them, as long as we are refusing to send them home.

Email this page	CLICK HERE TO VIEW democrats

NumbersUSA’s Roy Beck Assesses
Republican Presidential Candidates On Immigration Issues

View latest poll results for Republican and Democrat candidates

Click here to see the most recent delegate count totals for GOP candidates

Click on candidate's name for more information.

As of
Click name or image at right for detailed immigration & contact information	Rudolph Giuliani	Mike Huckabee	John McCain	Fred Thompson	Mitt Romney	Ron Paul	Tancredo (withdrawn)	Duncan Hunter
Assessing Overall Candidate Promises (See criteria below)
No amnesty — Attrition through enforcement pushes illegal aliens back home	abysmal	fair	abysmal	excellent	EXCELLENT	good	excellent	excellent
Stop future illegal immigration	fair	good	fair	EXCELLENT	EXCELLENT	good	excellent	excellent
Reduce legal immigration — Protect Americans from mass foreign worker competitions, congestion & sprawl	bad	fair	abysmal	good	poor	poor	excellent	good
Assessment of Past Immigration Actions in Political Office
Based on Congressional, Gubernatorial and Mayoral actions	bad	bad	abysmal	fair	good	good	excellent	excellent
Assessing Specific Legal Immigration Stances (See criteria below)
	Giuliani	Huckabee	McCain	Thompson	Romney	Paul	Tancredo	Hunter
End chain migration	poor	good	abysmal	excellent	FAIR	poor	excellent	good
End visa Lottery	poor	good	bad	good	poor	good	excellent	good
Control foreign worker numbers / protect U.S. workers	poor	poor	abysmal	good	bad	good	excellent	good
No citizenship for births to illegal aliens	abysmal	fair	poor	poor	poor	excellent	excellent	excellent
Assessing Specific ILLEGAL Immigration Stances (See criteria below)
	Giuliani	Huckabee	McCain	Thompson	Romney	Paul	Tancredo	Hunter
Mandatory workplace verification	fair	good	good	excellent	good	fair	excellent	excellent
Punish employers who hire illegal aliens	fair	excellent	fair	good	good	poor	excellent	excellent
Local enforcement of federal immigration laws	bad	excellent	good	good	excellent	good	excellent	excellent
Implement entry-exit system	good	excellent	fair	GOOD	fair	good	excellent	good
More security at borders	EXCELLENT	excellent	good	excellent	EXCELLENT	good	excellent	excellent
End sanctuary cities	bad	excellent	fair	excellent	excellent	good	excellent	excellent
Prohibit states from issuing driver's licenses to illegal aliens	good	excellent	poor	good	excellent	poor	excellent	good
Prohibit in-state tuition to illegal aliens	poor	bad	abysmal	excelleNt	excellent	fair	excellent	good
	Rudolph Giuliani	Mike Huckabee	John McCain	Fred Thompson	Mitt Romney	Ron Paul	Tom Tancredo	Duncan Hunter

SOURCES & EXPLANATIONS

ASSESSMENTS CHANGE WITH THE CANDIDATES: The NumbersUSA staff updates the candidate information pages every day. NumbersUSA Founder and CEO Roy Beck looks at those updates and adjusts his grading of the candidates based on the newest information of changes in candidate comments.

ROY BECK’S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING: “I look at these candidates ONLY in terms of what they have done about immigration and what they are promising to do on the issue.

“I grade all these candidates on how well they promise to carry out the recommendations of two national commissions in the 1990s and on other widely accepted goals for reducing overall illegal and legal immigration.

“I know that citizens choose to support a candidate based on many issues and on character and on past experience. I don’t endorse candidates because I don’t consider all those other aspects of the whole candidate. But I do candidly assess how each of them stacks up on immigration issues.

“I give the most weight to an official statement of promises, unless the candidate has said or done something since stating the policy to cast doubt on the promise.

“Absent an official policy, I give considerable weight to recent public statements. I leave room for candidates to shift positions; I don’t forever label them based on past statements or actions. The point here is what a candidate is most likely to do in the future as President, not grade them on past performances. But when current statements are ambiguous, contradictory, less than enthusiastically embraced or non-existent, I use past actions to help assess.

"If a candidate has said or done something new that calls into question a rating in a category, we will place black question marks (? ? ? ?) until we have sorted out where the rating should be."

If a candidate has taken no stand and made no statements about one of the issues on the grid, I give a "poor" rating because the candidate has failed to respond in any way to a crucial aspect of the immigration problem.

Most of the campaigns have contacted us at NumbersUSA to contest one or more ratings, and to ask how they can get better ratings. Staffers of a number of campaigns have sought to assure us that their candidate is really better than he/she appears in public on a particular issue. We appreciate the information from the staffers, but until a stance shows up on the official website or in comments made in public by the candidates themselves, we won't change the rating.

“If you don’t like my assessment of a candidate because you think I have used faulty information, contact us with your information. If you want your favorite candidate to get a better assessment from me, work to get that candidate to make better, more convincing promises on immigration.”

w w w . n u m b e r s u s a . c o m