New statement from Constitution Party chairman on immigration


Frank Fluckiger, Constitution Party National Chairman since April 2012


From ConstitutionParty.com: Immigration

by Frank Fluckiger, National Chairman
7 May 2014

StopAmnesty2 Retired Admiral James Lyons, who was senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations, has warned, “Fixing our porous borders is one of combating the threat of terrorism that America faces. In the various efforts to reform the U.S. immigration system, often overlooked in the debate is its impact on national security.” 

Yet there is no sense of urgency. In an interview with the Spanish broadcasting company Telemundo, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said many deportations were “totally unjustified” and that, “When most people are apprehended, they are deported. I don’t see any reason for these deportations.”

Nancy Pelosi is wrong and the American people know it. According to Rasmussen Reports, sixty percent of our fellow citizens believe the U.S. government is not aggressive enough in deporting illegal immigrants.

Our platform presents a clear choice between the establishment parties and the Constitution Party.

On the issue of immigration, our platform states:

“We affirm the integrity of the international borders of the United States and the Constitutional authority and duty of the federal government to guard and to protect those borders, including the regulation of the numbers and of the qualifications of immigrants into the country.”

And our candidates are courageously running on this platform. Here’s what David Lory VanDerBeek, our candidate for Governor in Nevada, has to say:

“I do NOT support amnesty, welfare, education, or any other program for illegal aliens because those programs encourage more illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is a federal problem and we must force our federal government to address it by deporting illegal aliens from Nevada.”

I am delighted to report David Lory VanDerBeek is already running at 12 percent according to the latest polls. 

The Constitution Party is on the right side of the issues, and our candidates are making an impact. That’s why your loyal support is so important. I will have some good news to report shortly on ballot access drives — again, those successes are directly tied to your financial help.

In the meantime, please take a moment and consider investing $20, $30 or even $50 in our progress. This year holds the promise of breaking new ground — your Constitution Party will have an impact on the elections. How much of an impact depends on you … volunteer for ballot drives; get involved with campaigns such as the VanDerBeek for governor effort; and support the Constitution Party with a gift of $15 … or $150.

Remember, our platform is blunt — we have to be during this time of political smoke and mirrors. Regarding immigration, here’s where your party stands:

“We oppose any extension of amnesty to illegal aliens. We call for the use of U.S. troops to protect the states against invasion.”

No other candidates run on that kind of plank — no other party except your Constitution Party offers voters that kind of message.Help us as we move forward with a donation of $25 or even $250 … it’s critical right now … the election season is well underway.

10 thoughts on “New statement from Constitution Party chairman on immigration

  1. Jeff Davidson

    Pelosi made a statement of fact – that when most people are apprehended, they are deported. Is this statement right or wrong? Fluckiger says this statement is wrong, but cites no facts or no statistics. Instead he sites a poll about people’s opinions. Arguments like these are why it is harder and harder to take the Constitution party seriously. He doesn’t even try to actually make a case that Pelosi is wrong on the facts. FWIW, Obama has been much more aggressive than any of his predecessors in deportations. That may be good or it may be bad, depending on your views, but it is true nevertheless.

  2. Peter Gemma

    the Obama Department of Homeland Security spends $4 billion annually deploying over 58,000 personnel with 16,875 vehicles, 269 aircraft, 300 watercraft, and 300 camera towers. It even uses aerial drones to enhance the scrutiny. In 2012, the Border Patrol apprehended about 357,000 people — a 78 percent drop since 2000. A February, 2013 GAO report found that just 44 percent of the border was under “operational control,” 37 percent was “monitored,” and the rest “low-level monitored.” (www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-374T)

  3. Peter Gemma

    of the 188,382 criminal aliens deported in 2011, at least 86,699, or 46 percent, had been deported earlier and had illegally returned to the United States. (In 2011, Illegal re-entry became the most commonly recorded lead charge brought by federal prosecutors, accounting for nearly 47 percent of all criminal immigration prosecutions filed.)
    (www.csmonitor.com/2006/0706/p09s01-coop.html/(page)/2)

  4. Starchild

    Peter Gemma – Thanks for supplying some hard numbers. Also worth mentioning is that the numbers of people being arrested trying to enter the U.S. decreased from 2000 to 2012 not necessarily because the Obama administration is any more inclined to respect the Constitution and the human right of freedom of movement than were the Bush and Clinton administrations, but simply because fewer people are attempting to come to the United States.

    A few additional data points:

    – 2011: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement removed 396,906 illegal immigrants from the United States, the largest number in the agency’s history. Of those, 216,698 (nearly 55%) had been convicted of felonies or misdemeanors. (ICE)

    – April 23, 2012: The Pew Hispanic Center announced that net migration from Mexico to the United States had stopped and possibly even reversed. The center noted that from 2005 to 2010, about 1.4 million Mexicans immigrated to the United States, and about 1.4 million Mexican immigrants and their U.S.-born children moved from the United States to Mexico.

    (From http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/15/facts-on-immigration-in-the-united-states/ )

    I do find it sad and ironic that the Constitution Party continues to favor violating the Constitution when it comes to immigration. The Constitution allows Congress to regulate *naturalization* (the process of becoming a citizen), but not *immigration* (who can enter the various states). For a party that is supposedly fiscally conservative, their willingness to support spending $4 billion a year in stolen taxpayer money in order for government to discriminate on the basis of nationality is also out of character and arguably hypocritical.

    Being credibly for limited constitutional government requires taking policy positions consistent with that stance, not just objecting to the kinds of government theft, aggression, and unconstitutional spending that one opposes while turning a blind eye to other manifestations of Big Government and even advocating for their expansion!

  5. paulie

    Great points, Starchild!

    of the 188,382 criminal aliens deported in 2011, at least 86,699, or 46 percent, had been deported earlier and had illegally returned to the United States.

    So the deportations, in addition to being immoral and costly, are also highly ineffective.

    (In 2011, Illegal re-entry became the most commonly recorded lead charge brought by federal prosecutors, accounting for nearly 47 percent of all criminal immigration prosecutions filed.)

    So it’s an infinite loop – like a case where the sole charge is resisting arrest. All at the expense of tax victims and human liberty.

    the Obama Department of Homeland Security spends $4 billion annually deploying over 58,000 personnel with 16,875 vehicles, 269 aircraft, 300 watercraft, and 300 camera towers. It even uses aerial drones to enhance the scrutiny. In 2012, the Border Patrol apprehended about 357,000 people

    Stop wasting money on this.

    In addition to deporting people, this bureaucratic juggernaut also harasses travelers, immigrants and citizens alike in numerous ways every day. And none of it is necessary or helpful in any way.

  6. Jeff Davidson

    Thanks Peter, Starchild, and Paulie for supplying the additional data that was not available to me when I posted. Peter’s comments reinforce the commitment the Obama administration has made to border security, for better or for worse, and that he has deported more people than any of his predecessors is beyond doubt.

    When we think about border security and what is realistic, I think Berlin is instructive. A much, much, much smaller border to secure. A wall (not just a fence) with razor wire. Armed guards willing to shoot to kill every several hundred feet. And people seeking freedom and a better life still braved it all, and still succeeded. “Securing the border” is a nice buzzword, and I respect those for whom it is a worthwhile goal and understand their view. It is also a chimera at best and a boondoggle at worst.

  7. paulie

    While it is admirable to relate to people’s stated concerns, I don’t think border security is an accurate term and I find it far too conciliatory to that position to call it such.

    With all the hardware and manpower at the border, all the harrassment, detention and deportations – whether of citizens, travelers, immigrants, or people “lucky” enough to live anywhere near the border – the border is far from secure.

    Indeed, I believe it would be far more peaceful – that is secure in the most important sense – if there was no active border enforcement at all.

  8. Thomas L. Knapp

    Here we go again. The chairman of the “Constitution” Party might want to read the, um, CONSTITUTION, which clearly and unambiguously forbids the federal government to regulate immigration.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *