An Exclusive Mini-Interview With Congressman Jack Kingston On Illegal Immigration

An Exclusive Mini-Interview With Congressman Jack Kingston On Illegal Immigration
This afternoon, I did an exclusive mini-interview with Congressman Jack Kingston on illegal immigration. What you'll see below is an edited, partial transcript of our conversation. Enjoy!

John Hawkins: Do you think the House approach to illegal immigration is better or is the Senate's comprehensive approach better? I think that some conservatives are worried that if we don't do the House approach, which is security, interior and border, first, we'll get the amnesty but we won't get the security.

Jack Kingston: ...(We've) already passed the House bill and I support it, but...what I don't want to do is let the Senate off the hook by saying, "We can only do this partial loaf." I would like them to...pass the House bill, but I also think we gotta charge back down the court and get on the scoreboard again.

You saw yesterday that they're really not serious yet, when they passed a bill making English the official language and then passed another bill saying, "We didn't mean it."

John Hawkins: Related to that, do you think illegal aliens should (get credit) for money they paid into Social Security while they were illegal...?

Jack Kingston: If you're illegal, you shouldn't be here and you shouldn't be entitled to benefits for being here....The more attractive you make it for people to be here, the more they're going to come. So, you don't want to pay benefits. If they pay into Social Security and they don't get any out of it because they're illegal, I'd say that's good money for the system...You know, they're here illegally and I just don't think that people who are here illegally should have the same rights and privileges as people who waited in line to become a citizen.

John Hawkins: Let me ask you another question. This is something that has come up recently. If our laws remain unchanged, we would be on pace to add about 19 million legal immigrants to this country in the next 20 years. Over at the Heritage Foundation, they're estimating that the Senate bill as written would up that number to 66 million. Senator Jeff Sessions' staff told me yesterday that their numbers put it at about 73-93 million over the next 20 years. While we have almost universal agreement that legal immigration is good for America, do you think upping the number of legal immigrants that much is a good idea or do you think it would be better to stay at the level we're currently at?

Jack Kingston: ...I think holding down the number is more appropriate at this time because of the large influx of illegals we're having to deal with and offset.

More @ http://tinyurl.com/lbfda RWN

The bold orange highlight in the excerpt is mine. I happen to be one of those people who don't believe that immigration is good for this country at this time. Yes it once was a good thing, however those days have come and gone long ago. Back in the halcyon days people came to the US to build something, not to mooch something. They came to build a better life, not to tell us how to run our country. They came to America to be American, not to import what they left behind and turn this nation into what they left. They came to America to assimilate and not to create whole regions of the nation that don't speak English and don't think of themselves as American.

The most immigration I would support for this nation is 100,000 a year and all of those would be carefully vetted. Just 100,000 people and not the extended family back to great-great-granddad.