podcast. >> tonight, british prime minister david cameron takes questions. then immigration policy, then, another chance watch "q&a." >> trying to maintain family time, eva roosevelt purchased land. >> close enough to d.c. that he could get out here as often as needed, but far enough away for wilderness. it was unique to the roosevelt.

it became a place where he had politicians and press and constantly a hubbub of activity. this was the one place where it was private family time. the roosevelt made it very clear they did not want anyone but family here. as wet edith roosevelt begin season two of our original series, looking at the public and private lives of the women who served our country. >> next, david cameron is back at the house of commons. less than a week earlier, the house of commons defeated his notion. from london, this is just over a half hour.

>> questions for the prime minister. prime minister, thank you, mr. speaker. i am sure the whole house will wish to join me in congratulating the duke and duchess of cambridge on the birth of their son from his royal highness prince george of cambridge. i am sure i speak for the whole nation is sending our congratulations and wish them and prince george a very happy and healthy life. i can assure honorable members they will be able to offer their own congratulations next monday when a formal motion is moved in the proper way. just her speaker, i had meetings with colleagues and others in addition to my duties in this house, i shall have further such meetings later today. >> [indiscernible] there has been good economic news around the country. our manufacturing is up, exports are up. it is time for those to stop messing around, give it up, and

abandon plan b. >> i think my friend makes an important point. we have had welcome news over the summer. exports up, business confidence at its highest level since january 2008, consumer confidence is up and all the figures on construction, manufacturing, and services all going in the right direction. we mustn't be complacent. these are early days. it is because of the tough decisions that this government took that we can see progress and we ought to remember the party opposite told us unemployment would go up, which it has come down. they told us the economy would go back, and it is going forward. it is time for them to explain they were wrong and we were right. [cheers] >> mr. speaker, i joined the prime minister in congratulating

you are in a the duke and duchess ofyou you he cambridge on the birth of prince -- the duke and duchess of cambridge on the birth of prince george. and i wish all of them all of the happiness in the world. at the g 20 summit in st. petersburg tomorrow, will the prime minister do everything he can to get other countries to match the u.k.'s important aid commitment to alleviate sanitary emergency in syria? given that we know on this one third of syrian families are being forced to flee their homes, yet the u.n. has left them have to resources that it needs. >> of course i will be taking an action because britain has a proud record on humanitarian

aid, not just in this conflict, but in many previous conflicts. we are the second largest aid donor there is. we have spent over 400 million pounds. it is very important the g 20 to make a number of points clear, absolute repulsion abuse of chemical weapons, our desire for peace process, but above all, getting donor countries together and making sure we do everything we can that they live up to the responsibilities and we do everything we can to help the syrian people in their hour of need. >> mr. speaker, the civil war in syria and the refugee crisis are having profound consequences not just in that country, but across the middle east, specifically in jordan and turkey, iraq, especially in lebanon where the population is up by 25% since the civil war began. what specific support the on the wealth and humanitarian assistance that his government is providing in britain give to these countries to help deal with the burden on infrastructure, their economy, and their [indiscernible] >> having venture refugee camp

in jordan myself, to see how greater pressures are common a refugee camp in jordan is now one of the biggest cities are is and that country. we have well-funded embassies, well-funded diplomatic networks, very close relations with lebanon and jordan and a close relationship with the turks as well. we're doing everything we can to

help and advise them. we're spending serious money on the humanitarian aid programs. at the end of the day, we need a solution to the syrian crisis. we need the peace process to be put in place. we also need to make sure we are absolutely clear about our repulsion of -- in terms of chemical weapons. we should be making sure our aid program is also helping give syrian people protection from the chemical weapons attacks they have suffered. >> the repulsion of the chemical weapons attack is shared on all sides of this house as the debate last thursday made clear. i wanted to come onto the seat of the prime minister aid which is getting the talk going between the warring parties. the opposition syrian national council is meeting i believe the foreign secretary next couple of days. can the prime minister tell us what work he is doing with them, the syrian national council, to make those talks in geneva happen? >> what we're doing with the steering national council is twofold. one, we want to support those limits of the syrian opposition that support a pro-listed democratic and free syria. that is what our engagement with them has been all about. but we go further than that because we recognize the so- called rebels who backed those views also deserve our support, our support in terms of training and assistance and device because the truth is this. we won't get a peace process in syria unless president assad realizes that actually his regime is under some sort of pressure, some sort of threat from not just the rebels, but from the millions of syrians who we must be standing up for who want to mock received, want freedom, what a better future for themselves and their children. dosh who want democracy, want freedom, want a better future for themselves and their children. >> all parts of this house due to stand up for the innocent people of syria.

and assistance and device the question at issue -- i think the house has approached this in a calm and measured way in we should carry on doing that. the point at issue is how to do that. mr. speaker, there are large barriers, big barriers, as we found out over the last year or more, to the geneva peace talk action happening. can ask the prime minister whether this is a case for immediate talks between those parties with those countries backing the rebels and those countries backing the regime? that happened during the civil war in lebanon and would have at least provided a basis for discussion.

>> i agree with the gentleman that britain should use all of its diplomatic muscle to discuss with those countries that goes back to the regime and join with those countries who backed rebels and the opposition to try bring this talks about. i have had repeated discussions, for instance, with president putin, most recently last monday, and why i travel to see into discuss this issue. it is well for the country supporting either side to want these peace talks to take place, but what you also need is for those people involved in the conflict in syria to recognize it is in their interest to see a peace process start to begin. i think we can convince the syrian national council it is in their interest, because transition could lead to genuinely free elections and change for syria. but we need the regime, assad himself, to realize that it is in his interest because there is no victory he can win against his own people. and for that to happen, we need to take and the world needs to take a very tough response to things like chemical weapons attack. i accept that britain cannot be part and won't be part of any military action on that front, but we must not add any degree give up odor results in -- the repulsion. >> mr. speaker, nobody disagrees with our repulsion of chemical weapons, but how do we deal with it?

the thing i said to the prime minister is given the careful told the -- difficulty of giving direct talks moving the twin the syrian government and the opposition were there isn't a case for getting a regional partners involved, we all know i the roleran has played in feeling this conflict. given the successful diplomacy involves talking to those whom we profoundly disagree, what is the government's position on

iran participating either in a contact or part of the geneva process? >> as a foreign secretary said, he will be meeting with the iranian foreign minister any is in new york for the u n general assembly. let's not forget what iran has done to our embassy in our country. we should not put that on one side. the point i would make to the gentleman is, of course, we all want these peace talks to take place and we all went geneva ii to happen, but we can't want more than the participants involved in syria possibility conflict. we have to make sure in their interest that these talks go ahead. that is why, yes, diplomacy is important, but the work we do with the syrian opposition's that supports democracy that supports a pluralistic fair and free syria, that is important.

there are standing up for millions of syrians who have been bombed and blasted out of their houses. those of the people you need to talk to in the refugee camps in jordan and elsewhere to see how they feel, how badly the rest of the world is currently letting them down. >> nobody disagrees with that or, indeed, the view we take about iran's behavior. the question is, how are we going to bring the parties together, including the regional parties? finally, mr. speaker, and we accept the remains support across the country for britain taking every diplomatic, political, into miniature an effort to help the syrian people? at last week's vote, he was not about britain shirking its global responsibility, it was about preventing a rush to war. >> last week the house of commons voted clearly, and i've said i respect the outcome out of that vote, and i won't be bringing back transfer british anticipation of military action. i agree we must use everything about iran's behavior. the question is, how are we we can in our power, our diplomatic networks, our influence with other countries, our membership of all the key bodies to bring to bear. my only regret of last week as i don't think was necessary to divide the house on a vote [indiscernible] [cheers] >> thank you, mr. speaker.

we hear today the u.k. services business activity index is at its highest level for 6.5 years. does this not show the government economic odysseys are

working? and with the prime minister commit to ensuring our increased prosperity, help us to pay [indiscernible] [applause] >> the good news about this economic recovery from early as it is, we are seeing it more and more. there are more people employed and there were when this government came to office. 1.3 million private sector jobs. we need to see further progress with that because the best route out of poverty -- the best way to improve living standards is to see increasing number of men and women in gainful work. >> thank you. might i press the prime minister on the relations with iran. his previous answers sounded as if he it taken their account of the facts that since our embassy was outrageously sacked by ahmadinejad, there has been an election in a run -- in iran that is led to a different individual becoming president, shoe my knowledge, is someone the west and the minister can do with.

can we take steps now to improve relations with iran, identified those, and try to get them involved with syria? >> i agree that the election of a president who has a greater commitment to reform is a positive step, but i've written to the president to raise a series of issues that need to be settled between britain and iran, and above all, we need to see progress on what president rouhani himself is said is important, which is trying to come to an agreement where iran gives up the idea of nuclear weapons and in return, we see some relief on sanctions. that would be major progress. but we should do this not from a position of just hoping for the best. we have seen with this country iran has been come -- capable up in the recent past and

should proceed cautiously. >> does the prime minister agreed that [indiscernible] is the prime minister aware that 4% of the people believe elvis is still alive? to think [indiscernible] [cheers] [laughter] >> i can see my honorable friend has put his time to good use. you need to see a round of opinion polls before you can see a true trend. [laughter] >> why does the prime minister believe -- what is the prime minister believed that his plans [indiscernible] >> i was listing to the exchanges before i came into the

questions and it seems to be there is a concerted lobbying campaign being run by the trade unions who mysteriously managed to have convinced a member of parliament opposite [indiscernible] we all know what is going on. they don't want the trade unions wrought within the law. -- brought within the law. they want them to spend millions after millions, trying to alter an election campaign rather than have them properly controlled by the law. that is what the lobbying bill is about. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the u.k. economy is set to benefit from around 50 million pounds by hosting the clipper around the world yacht race that kicks off this week.

will the prime minister come and personally congratulate those were literally flying the flag for britain's tourism trade and water sports? >> i think my honorable friend is absolutely right. i've seen a model of this

incredible vessel and i join her in welcoming the contribution the clipper makes to the british economy. even better to see the flotilla was led by british folk. i will take into account her kind invitation to come. i wish those taking part well. >> take the prime minister back to the answer he gave to my friend a moment ago, can you be more positive about building better relations urgently with iran as one of the keys to bringing about a peace process

in syria across the whole region? simply attacking iran all the time isn't going to bring them to the negotiating table. it is much better if he is much more positive about it. >> if you're trying to build a relationship with someone, it depends on the actions a tape. given the iranian government was complicit in the completely smashing of our embassy and residence in tehran, we will want to see some actions so we can build that sort of relationship. now, i have reached out by writing to president rouhani, congratulating him on his secession to power, but if we believe there's just some magical key to the syrian conflict by suddenly adopting a totally different posture towards iran, i don't think we are making a very good decision. >> last week we saw the proportion of households fall to the lowest level since records began. this is further evidence [indiscernible] all opposed by the party opposite.

>> i think my honorable friend makes a good point. and the second quarter of 2013, there are three .5 million workers households in the k, down 182,000 on the air. -- there are 3.5 million workers households in the u.k., down 182,000 on the year. each torry is about how people think it into work, provide for their families, make something of their lives. we should be proud of the welfare that we have put through . every single one opposed by the party opposite. we have not just saved 83 billion pounds of welfare measures they opposed, but we have given hope to liens of families in our country. >> mr. prime minister, i condemn chemical attacks in syria, but is it not time for joint

thinking? surely, an american strike now would squander the opportunities offered by the new iranian leadership and by the new u.s. initiative in palestine. with the prime minister do with the british people want, insist the g 20 for chance of away to bring about a cease-fire rather than a new bombing raid? >> as i said, i respectfully the decision the house came to after the debate last week. britain won't play any part in military action. a big yourself in the shoes of the president of the united states and others. he set a clear red line that if there was a large scale chemical weapons used, something under happen. we know the regime used chemical

weapons on at least 14 previously occasions. i think having said that red line, made that warning, to ask the president of the united states to step away, i think that would be a perilous suggestion to make. in response, i think it's a more chemical weapons attack. of course, the honorable lady has a very long track record of supporting peace, supporting peace talks, and i support that. i will do everything i can to try to bring the geneva ii peace talks together. i don't believe there is a contradiction in taking the top line on local weapons of a revolting in our modern world and also wanting the peace talks they can bring this crisis to an end. >> thank you. cancer funding is half that in birmingham. have.

academic research suggests the current funding formula discriminates against rural areas and older people. does the prime minister share my view that the nhs should move as quickly as possible toward fairer funding for rural areas? >> he makes an important point. we have given a lot of these decisions away from investors to nhs england and they said they're looking at a fairer funding formula, and i'm sure there will look at the arguments that he has made. i would also ask them to look at the cancer drugs fund, which has been a phenomenal success. >> mr. speaker, can the prime minister tell the house what he is doing to support food banks and the united kingdom? >> what we have done is something the food bank movement has been asking for for years, but labor didn't grant them because they were worried about the pr and that was the ability to say to people could this he

needed help, they could get to food bank. that might be something that labor didn't want to do because it was bad publicity. we did it because it was the right thing. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. does the prime minister agree with maybe, nation of the good weather, our deficit reduction, and our control on public spending has given confidence to business and individuals to create 1.3 million jobs? however, given these encouraging figures, is he somewhat surprised the opposition still labor didn't want to do because believes our policy would cost one million jobs? >> the fact that andy murray won wimbledon could be added into that good weather. much of good news to be had over the summer. it is important we recognize what has brought this good news about. there was a key judgment the parties had to make about whether in this parliament to get to grips with the deficit and take the tough decisions that we needed to turn our country around. we made those tough decisions on the side of the house. the party opposite docked every single one of them. -- ducked every single one of them. >> providing free nursery to disadvantage two years old, the figures show four in 10 councils

won't have sufficient places. can the prime minister guarantee that all of those children promised a place will actually have one? >> we have put in place the funding to provide that for the disadvantaged two-year-olds, and i'm confident they will receive the services they deserve. >> our constituency is lower than any time since 2010. locally, i have organized two very successful job fairs and am organizing a third. does the prime minister agree this goes to show the government who is right to stick to the economic plan despite calls to abandon the by the members opposite? >> i think my honorable friend is right.

the figures on employment are encouraging. there are more people in work in our country than ever before. there are more people in private sector employment than ever before. there are record number of women in work in our country, no must one million more people in work compared with the situation that we inherited. at some stage, the party opposite is going to have to get off the bench and admit they got it wrong. even today, he says he's going to borrow even more. even when we have started turning around the economy, his learned absolutely nothing. >> 3.3 billion pound profit windfall while or near family size energy bills going up by 300 pounds a year. why is the prime minister failed to stand up to energy companies and get a better deal from the energy market for ordinary families? >> i don't know where the honorable lady was during the debate on energy bill, but this government is legislating to make sure that people are put on the lowest tariffs. this government has done that when the leader of the labour party was inergy secretary, incidentally bills went to the roof, there was none of the sort of action. >> given every sign these figures upwards -- given the figures have been rounded upwards, very low unemployment, very good condition for young people to get work, that is why my honorable friend thinks this would have been achieved if you taken the advice of the chancellor. >> is interesting what my honorable friend said. every time there's a question about the economy, the fact there are more people in work, more businesses getting established, that our economy is growing him at a party opposite don't want to hear a word of it. they know what the whole country can see, britain is exceeding and labor is failing. >> will the prime minister accept any responsibility for the fact it is now forecasted than on wages, working people will at the time of the election on average have lost 6660 pounds while he has been number 10? >> there's only one sustainable way to get living standards up, and that is to get the economy growing, which we're doing, that is to cut taxes, which were delivering, and that is to keep mortgage rates low, which we are doing. the fact is, if we listen to the party opposite who only have one plan ash spend more, borrow more

, build up more debt -- we will be back to where we started. [cheers] >> as the syrian tragedy has unfolded, i have always had the armageddon question in the back of my mind, which i shall now in an understated form, if i may, but to the prime minister. if the americans illegally bombard the assad forces and assad legally invites the russians in to degrade the rebels, what will nato do? >> the first point i would make, we would never support the legal action. we debated and discussed this at some length last week. it isn't the case that the only way action can be legal is a human resolution, so we would only support action that was legal. we would only support action that was proportionate. as i said, britain would not be ticking pardon any of this action. but in a way you to put the armageddon question around the other way, which is if no action

is taken following president obama's red line, and if no action is taken following the supporting use of chemical weapons, you have to ask yourself, what sort of armageddon or the syrian people going to be facing? >> thank you, mr. speaker. the prime minister said he does not support attack site for those living [indiscernible] the claims some people living in these areas are capital rich and cash poor. can the prime minister tell me, support for the bedroom tax the punishing people [indiscernible] and have no cash. >> first of all, he has to get clear what is a tax and what is not. or was a subsidy for people who add additional room and we believe it is fair the same rules in private sector, nations -- private sector consolidations. you have ranted and raved about the fair room subsidy. are you going to reverse it? just nod. are you going to reverse it? that means no, that means yes. absolutely nothing to say. >> mr. speaker, thank you. it is a decision for someone to leave their home in the country fleeing for their own safety. how many people must have left syria for it is impossible for its regime to declare any kind of moral entitlement to govern the country? >> i don't believe the regime has any legitimacy. i think the way it has treated its own people, i think the bombing and maiming of its own citizens, and now this use of chemical weapons, i see this as a completely illegitimate regime. but what we now have to do is bring every pressure to bear for transition so we can end up with syria in totally different hands. that is what is required. >> the cost of the uniform has spiraled to 285 pounds this year as academies insist on bringing clothing.

one academy, 70% of the parents had to take out loans to pay for the uniform. why has the prime minister failed to act so that his school policy is now leading [indiscernible] >> like many people and many parents, i think is absolutely right for schools from if they want to choose, to have a tough and robust uniform policy. i was at the opening of a new free school in birmingham yesterday, where all of the parents in that room were very grateful of the fact that is exactly the policy they had. i have to say what i see from the honorable lady is just trying to find a way to oppose free schools. the fact is, we now have 194 free schools in our country that they don't like it because, actually, parents inc. is a good

education. they're going to have to listen to the figures. two thirds of these goals are either good or outstanding, and at some stage, just as they got it wrong over the economy, the labour party is going to have goodman they got it wrong about free schools as well. >> a cost the ministry of defense 1.4 billion pounds to extend the life of the for trayvon summaries in order the liberal democrats could have a study of alternatives -- four trident summaries and order for the liberal democrats to have a study of alternatives. so it can never again be blackmailed by the liberal democrats in the house parliament? >> i have to credit the honorable gentleman with a remarkable proficiency on this issue, on which basically, i agree with him. we have trident, it is the right approach, and we need to renew

trident. the delay of the decision has saved us money rather than cost us money. his point about the review i think is absolutely right. it shows if you want to have a proper functioning deterrent, then you need to have the best and that means a permanently at sea bass alternative, and that is what a conservative only government after the next election will deliver.

>> is it not the case -- [indiscernible] the honorable gentleman is somewhat of in exotic creature. i think that excites the interest. i do wish to hear what he has to say on any must be heard.

>> is it not the case that real wages have fallen by nearly 1500 pounds a year since you became prime minister? >> of course we live in tough times. because of the incredible mess we've had to clear up from the party opposite. i have to say the party opposite complaining about the economy, complaining about living standards, is like the arsonist complaining to the fire brigade. it is his government turning it around. >> mr. gordon [indiscernible] recently awarded by the department of business, the must for stooges award -- the most prestigious award. congratulate the many businesses are members. >> a certain the businesses, large and small enterprise they have shown. the fact about this recovery, it is a private sector her that recovery. that is what we needed after the mass of excessive government spending. it is been very good. businesses have done so much to take people on and get our economy moving. >> that from earlier this morning in london. president obama overseas today

in stockholm, sweden. the president saying according to the associated press that if the u.s. fails to act, it would embolden repressive regimes, speaking of syria, around the world to flout all sorts of international standards. the president being quoted as saying the moral thing to do is not to stand by and do nothing. that again, president obama at a news conference on the question about syria this morning in stockholm, sweden, before he heads off to saint petersburg, russia for the g 20 summit. members of congress in a closed- door intelligence briefing today on syria. liveliest 7:00 a.m. eastern, "question time." watch any time on c-span.org.

>> the president has a lot of to support the idea of military strikes. has a congressman hearing on tuesday, and then eric cantor mentioned a house vote, but not for two weeks. how could it be that long and be seen sooner? collects it is possible we could see it sooner. we couldis possible see it sooner. right now, it would fail. there is at least 139 members on our list who are saying they would vote against us right now. very few members willing to come out in public and say they would vote yes. what we will see over the next couple of weeks is a lot of

behind-the-scenes work. a lot of classified briefings, a lot of phone calls by president obama lieutenants trying to convince people to support the idea of a military strike. >> what about the senate? >> we will see a vote this week. a vote on wednesday that would be a procedural step to move the measure to authorize a limited military strike on syria. it is not clear they have the 60 votes necessary, either. we have 65 senators right now, undecided. only about 25 or so -- president obama has work to do. >> why is he meeting with them and what does he hope to accomplish? >> he is hoping to get as many of them as possible for support. only nine republicans so far

have come out. senate republicans have come out so far and said they would support the president on this. you will probably need a few more than that. you will see a lot of liberal senators, voting against this. i am trying to shore up the numbers a bit. >> is president obama making his case? >> that will be the story of the have come out. week. on monday, president obama is doing five television reviews. tuesday, from the oval office. lawmakers from the house and senate are hearing from -- aboutents about. syria. what they are hearing is, do not vote for this peer the president will try to shift public opinion as much as he can so senators and house lawmakers are hearing something different from constituents. >> public opinion leaning largely against u.s. strikes, how is that affecting how it might play out in the house or senate?

>> you can really see it in the house right now. it represents a smaller, geographic area. they are very in tune with what they are hearing from to -- constituents. lawmakers in both parties have said it is 101 against military -- 100-onesyria. against military action in syria. president obama is trying to do something to shift public opinion on this. >> thank you for your time. chambers a lot.class of commerce -- congress returned monday. house lawmakers are facing a vote to help authorize the use of military force against the assad regime. also expected to take up a short-term spending bill. coverage here on c-span.

senators return to what is expected to be a weak line -- weeklong debate. ony take a pair of votes judicial nominations and 5:30. 2.u can watch on c-span >> monday, thomas kean and lee new reportesents a on terrorist threats. it assesses al qaeda and affiliates as the result of military strikes in syria. join us live for that conversation at 10:00 a.m. eastern . to discuss the use of chemical weapons by the assad regime and the call by the obama administration for military strikes in syria. beginning at 12:30 p.m. eastern.

>> next, immigration policy with a member of the house andland security committee theael butler, hosted by university of florida. this is one hour and 20 minutes. >> good evening. from the auditorium on the campus good evening and welcome to the president speaker series. on behalf of dr. john c johnson, the president, i am the moderator of tonight's event. the we begin our series with a look on the impact -- two experts will talk about that. first, we will look at the situation in.. this will be a live broadcast, with a subsequent broadcast on c-span and youtube. we will begin introducing our two guest. an interview up front and then we will go to questions from you in the audience. two very powerful guest join us tonight. our first from in the middle

here, the former mayor in pennsylvania, a congressman from the 11th congressional district, migrate privilege and pleasure to introduce the congressman. [applause] to his right is a former ins agent, a columnist, a much sought after speaker, and he has testified on illegal immigration. [applause] >> welcome. thank you for being here tonight. let us begin before we get to the subject and talk about the

situation as it exists in syria. i know you have been getting calls wondering how you will vote. the president says he will put it to congress and decide if we send missiles into syria. how do you feel? >> i -- i am very happy the president decided to consult with congress before taking any action. back home, in my district, i do not know if i have gotten any phone calls from anyone who wants to go to war. i will wait to get a classified briefing when i get back monday. there are a number of factors that need to be discussed. i am anxious to hear what the strategy and goal is, if we do strike syria. what is the end goal and what is that purpose? the factors that make this such a difficult decision is that the rebels we know are mixing with al qaeda members, mixed in with the rebels who we are supporting against assad.

we have israel, a threat of retaliation against israel, our traditional allies not with us. it makes the decision for me very difficult as to what the purpose and goal is. with that being said, i will keep an open mind and listen to the information that is brought to me before i decide our move. >> knowing some of the leadership in the house and senate have already joined the president, that make your decision board of the? >> not at all. leadership in washington did not send me there. the people in my district, that is how i got there and that is whose voice i am bringing to washington with me. some of the classified information i will not be able to share with constituents back home will make the decision more difficult. you have to take that into account. some of the unknown that the public may not see. >> we have talked over 10 years. a national radio program of your own. you and the congressman have traveled around the country and discussed illegal immigration. first, your thoughts on syria? wax a tough situation, as we have seen, in afghanistan and iraq. we know iran is playing a heavy

role into the situation. the congressman made the point about concerns about reprisal but -- reprisals against israel. when i covered a terrorist plot in the 1970's. my concern is that america might also face reprisals at home. we know there is a growing presence of iranian shock groups. we know they are here. less than a year ago, there was an attempt made to killed a saudi ambassador. what people really need to understand is the oceans do not really give us much buffer. that is why i always make the point that while people always talk about california, mexico, and texas, we have 50 border states. we really have a problem in the fact there are millions of foreign nationals living inside the united states today whose identities and ultimate goals are unknown and unknowable. there may be people waiting for a phone call.

>> a follow-up and then we will move on. some wonder if we do nothing in., that ends a google to the iranian government that we may be week. >> the president has drawn the red line and they have crossed it. it puts the united states in a very bad position on how we are viewed globally on whether or not the united states is credible. without a doubt, it is very important we speak with one voice. that will weigh into the decision. >> the problem is what happens if america ask and it does not stop the problem. there are tough decisions to make. i have to say something. this is one of the reasons i am proud to consider him a friend. when you asked him about his leadership, his answer was that he speaks to his constituents.

he truly does represent his constituents. >> we will show some quotes based on some of the writings and things said to tell the story of how this particular president speaks really happened.

several years ago, we learned about a van mayor in pennsylvania. i will ask the congressman to tell the story, but first, less is more. illegal is illegal. he made a statement may 3, 2007. what were you addressing? why did you say it? >> immediately, i created the first law in the country dealing with immigration, and the world media was at my doorstep asking why i am doing this. to me, there was no gray area.

i did not he one. i said, because illegal is illegal. this was not anti-immigrant. we are not talking about immigrants coming here, but people who entered the country illegally. >> how many people were there when the problem started? 50,000? >> 30,000 people. that's ok. what happened. why did your city all the a haven? >> the question i needed answered, we why hazleton? 2000 miles away from the southern border. the last place you would think to have an eagle immigration problem. it took me a while to actually come to the final determination that we have a problem with illegal immigration. i was elected mayor in 2000.

it was a city that was bankrupt. a very safe, quiet city. one murder every seven years. the six years in between, they would talk about that one murder. senior citizens like to sit on their porches and talk to their neighbors. the city began changing in 2001. i had my first encounter with illegal immigration. i was called to an apartment with nine men sleeping on the floor in mattresses. the apartment was not fit for human beings, let alone for animals. you do not want to watch human beings exploited like this. we called ins. at the time, they were still ins. they told us to simply tell them to move on. i did not agree with it, but that is what we did. shortly after that, on a friday night in october, which are big

nights, high school football nights, after the football games, the students would go downtown and hang out at a local pizzeria. this friday night was different. hector, and illegal alien on a drug deal gone bad, shot two people 100 feet from where high school students were standing outside, killing one and wounding another. that murder terrified our city. again, another illegal alien in the city. i thought that was not usual. this was happening over and over again, until i realized we have a problem with illegal immigration. our population grew by 50%, a huge group -- growth for a city. our tax revenue remained the same. >> that is something we wanted to discuss tonight. how do you provide services when your revenue is broken? >> on the first page of the lawsuit, i described how illegal immigration diminishes the

quality of life in the community for that very reason. when you -- when you can no longer provide the leverage -- level of services to the public to keep them safe, take care of the people, the issues, code violations, you begin to lose the quality of life of small- town america. i could no longer do it. we did not have money to hire more police. what i did, once i realized the problem was much bigger than what we could handle, i went to

washington in december 2005 and met with the department of justice. it was a great day. they brought in all these experts to talk to me and the police -- chief i explained the problem and talked about the game -- the gangs, i talked about our lack of revenue to deal with the problem. what i got was a knife -- a nice coffee mug, a pat on the back, and i realize the federal government, who caused the problem by not enforcing our laws, would do nothing to resolve it. vice is the makeup of illegal aliens varied or is it largely hispanic? >> we have a very diverse community. we made people from romania there -- the main problem of those in the country illegally or from the dominicans, which was very interesting, especially sitting on the homeland security committee. when i talk about illegal immigration, the focus is always on the southern border. i know better. 40% of the people in the country illegally did not rock that border and did not cross any border. they come here on a visa and it expires and they melt into the system and disappear. we have no way to track them. many people in the country illegally did not cross the

southern border. they entered through our airports. >> when you were the mayor, i was on a flight back to daytona beach seated next to a catholic nun, and i said, sister, how is the mayor doing? she said, he's by himself than we do not go out at night. how prevalent was the feeling among residents when you are mayor toward the end, knowing it was an almost insurmountable problem at that point? >> it came to light for me one morning when i drove to city hall and went to get into my parking spot reserved for the mayor, and i could not get there because there was an elderly woman waiting for me. she started hitting me in the chest with her finger and said, you better do something. i can no longer sit on my porch any longer. i am afraid to go out. i walked up to my office and, being born and raised in hazleton and being the mayor, i was proud to be the mayor of the city i grew up and to realize senior citizens could no longer enjoy that this was how they were living, and they could no longer enjoy being outside, i never realized i had to do something.

i was standing alone. to not get a politician come near me for weeks. it was refreshing. no one came there to campaign. >> that is right. i skipped it. >> they did. not only presidential candidates. senator clinton, senator obama, and senator mccain, pennsylvania was six weeks alone in the primary. every day, i picked up the picture -- the paper and see one of them close but never stopping there. after a while, i got to inking maybe it was me causing them not to stop, because i do not think anybody wanted to ask the

question, how do you feel about what i did. i stood alone, until we were sued by illegal aliens who sued the a.c.l. will -- lu, and ice -- i thought i was standing by myself, but there were millions of americans standing with me. >> should i talk about going to washington in december 2005 and coming home with a coffee mug. may 10, 2006, we had arrested a 14-year-old for selling drugs in a playground. it was a playground i grew up on. he was selling cocaine. when i arrested him, he had called his lawyer who he had on the dial, which i thought was an usual for a 14-year-old.

he was in the country illegally. i felt like i had lost control of the city. that night, i got a call from the chief of police at 1:00 in the morning. a man had been shot in the head while working on his pickup truck last night. arrested seven times before he became -- came to hazleton. he wished -- shot and killed him in the face. 36 hours to apprehend those involved. we spent half our years in the budget. i sat with him who wanted to know why this man still stood in the country. i had enough. washington was not going to do anything else. i took an oath to protect and defend the people in my community. punishing businesses that knowingly hired illegal aliens, and landlords who knowingly hired illegal area -- aliens,

because they are illegal. those who sued the city were illegal aliens. i was told they would a corrupt our city and get me out at election time if i did not back down. i said, i will get another job if that happens, but i will not act down. we went to court. we had no money. i said there were millions of americans who stood with me and i knew that because i began getting checks around the country. i remember a veteran sent me seven dollars and said, this is all i have in my wallet. continue to fight. we went to court. the plaintiffs had to ask the judge if they could have their names kept anonymous because they did not want the public to know who they were.

the judge granted the request. we were not allowed to ask their names. they asked if they could not have to come to go to the courtroom out of fear of being deported. they did not have to. the judge granted that request. i believe illegal aliens were given more rights than you and i are given. we cannot sue the city and remain anonymous. aliens. >> are they city-- the judge ruled in favor of illegal aliens. >> are they city schools? what is the financial impact? >> english as the second language. .

. . [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

back in may of '97 because the first two attacks on american soil. on 9/11, my neighbors sitting on their sidewalks crying because they didn't know where their family members were. i had a couple of congressional hearings, including, by the way, the mohammed atta, two of the terrorists were granted entry to

flight school six months after 9/11. i got a call from sheila jackson-lee's council asking if i would testify and i got a release saying i was testified for tom tancredo without authority. i was doing speaking engagements. we went to kansas university, kansas state. chris contacted me and asked me to be in on this trial. i went from hofstra out on long island to pennsylvania and i was the final witness at the trial. that's how lou and i got to meet each other. because what you really need to understand is that immigration isn't a single issue, but a singular issue because it impacts every challenge and threat we're facing starting at the top of national security, going to criminal justice and public safety, the economy, the

unemployment, environment, health care, education, public health. even the quality of life and whether communities can deal with the influx of people because of economically or infrastructure. water supply, highways, buses, subways, everything. not about being anti-immigrant. my own background, my mother came here in the holocaust. it's a legal system that has integrity because of a threat posed by a system that doesn't have integrity. i was happy to have as a final note, i spent half my career as a drug task force. i was at the unified intelligence division at the eta. so if you look at that angle, what you were telling me was disturbing but something i was all too familiar with. >> i want to fast forward to

another comment that was made. the congressman said some days the republicans are well advised to speak about this sensitive issue with greater delicacy. belief is in the rule of law, most law-abiding immigrants would be, if they obey the rule, others should as well. what kind of response have you gotten from colleagues on the hill with statements like this? >> obviously there are many in washington that would like to step around and walk around the topic of illegal immigration. there's a belief, there's no question, that there's support whether your democratic republican for the growing hispanic population that is here. and when you take a stand against illegal immigration, as i do, many people feel that this is not good for our party. the point that i want to make,

that i do make to my colleagues is that the city i was mayor of is 49% hispanic. i won with 90% of the vote. for mayor of hazleton which is an example that immigrants, immigrants, realize that illegal immigration isn't good for them. those who came for a better opportunity, a better education for their children, for a better life, understand that allowing millions of people into the country illegally doesn't give the opportunities to them. in my hometown where people know me the best, i've been able to get support from that population. one other point i think is very important and i talk about it in washington a lot is from the very first year i created the ordinance, our hispanic population grew every single

year. so this theory that if you stand up against illegal immigration, you will be driving immigrants out of town just isn't true. in fact, why would you move to a city if you felt you weren't welcome? so these theories that i believe are created by the media many times just -- they're not reality. >> i think everyone who is listening and watching wants to know what do we do with those who are here illegally? most common question is, those who have raised their question, what do you do with children who through no fault of their own find themselves in this country. what's a workable solution? congress is going to be asked to weigh in on this. the senate has. what do we do with those who are here illegally. do we keep them? do we send them home? your thoughts. >> that's the most asked question right now in washington. and my answer is very, very easy to respond to. what do we do about the 22 million americans that couldn't find work this morning when they

woke up? what do we do about the single mom that's working three jobs to put food on her table to feed her children that will lose her job because of someone who will take her job away from her. or the high school dropout, what will he or she get a job. why in this debate is it always about what should we do about those who knowingly came here illegally and the debate is never about what about the innocent victims of illegal immigration? what are we going to do about that? the truth of the matter, if we talk about a pathway to citizenship, we're going make it worse. we're encouraging people to come here illegally through open borders. we know they're open. we're going to wave citizenship like a cheap suit around the world to come to america and we're going to grant you

citizenship because we don't know what to do. michael keller? >> well, i don't want to turn it into a law lecture. but -- but the way, if you want to read the commentary, you can get the law, this is about laws. the title code is a list of the categories of aliens to be excluded. the inspections process. i began my career as an inspector in kennedy airport way back in 1971. if you look at the list, it makes it clear how important the immigration laws are. it starts with aliens with dangerous communicable diseases, those who are seriously ill, prone to violence, aliens who are convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminal,

terrorists, rapists, members of violent gangs, money launderers, gun runners. aliens who are a public charge or working illegally compete unfairly with american workers or diminish wages and working conditions. in fact, what most people don't know is prior to the second world war, the immigration laws was primarily the responsibility of the labor department. we shielded the american workers from unfair competition and built the middle class. there's a quote i want to read. i think this is important. having lived through 9/11. and this country did. not only america that was attacked, for me, it was my hometown. it was perhaps obvious to state that the terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the united states if they're unable to enter the country, yet prior to september 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the u.s. government thought of

counterterrorism as an arsenal. after 19 hijackers got the ease of a visa, border security is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. we believe for reasons we will discuss in the following pages it should be made one. this is the 9/11 commission staff report on terrorist travel. so it's remarkable to me that the politicians in washington and in the administration debating whether or not we need to enforce the immigration laws and secure the borders while we face the continuing threat of terrorism, the continuing growth of transnational drug trafficking organizations in the united states, and we're being told the border is secure. the one metric, and i want everyone out there to think about this, because we're being told that when i was on with neil cavuto, he said the border patrol is down, mike, but that would mean it's not much of a problem. i'm trying to figure out how many illegals are here based on arrests is like taking

attendance and asking people not present to raise their hands. it doesn't work. you want the real metric? what's the price of drugs? because heroin and cocaine come across the same border whether it's in an international airport, the sea port, or the rio grande as do the illegal aliens. if the border were secure, drugs are not available, supply and demand kicks in. the price goes up. the borders are wide open. it's indangering safety and contributing to unemployment. >> that comes to a cornerstone issue. we're going to come to the audience for questions in a few minutes. some say it's an impossible task to secure the borders. everyone talks about the southern border but the far greater northern border is more porous. it might have been you, congressman, or someone who said the next attack on this country they feel will not be planes crashing into buildings but by people blowing up supermarkets near the border. violence in texas, people

crossing the border killing american ranchers. why is none of this part of the discussion that's about to come before the house? how to help our own people to be safe? >> it is. for me, i bring this point up in the homeland security border subcommittee, the focus i believe needs to be border security first and foremost. and when we talk about border security, we cannot just focus on the southern border. we need to focus on all borders, north, south, east, west airport, sea ports. the statistic i talked about a little earlier over 40% of the people who are in the country illegally, they don't cross a border. they don't know if someone left

or not. i introduced a bill to track someone. i don't want the american people to be fooled by any bill that passes in washington that claims the borders are secure because we have done something about the southern border. that is not securing our border. >> i want to give a quote on michael cutler, you wrote in the dc march for jobs, the gang of eight and their cronies say the immigration system is broken, the failures of the immigration system are attributable to failures to enforce immigration laws. >> that's right. >> why is it they will not answer this? when you speak to this issue and you testified, why is it they don't answer that? >> the goal is to satisfy the campaign contributors. there's a remarkable quote -- and i have do this because alan greenspan testified for chuck schumer back on april 30, 2009. it was about the need for

comprehensive reform. it's not good that you're going to give illegal aliens registration. he quoted me by name three separate days. he's a conservative republican, i'm a lifelong democrat. this is an american issue, mark. but you have to understand the insanity of what alan greenspan said. he said about bringing in lots more foreign workers at the higher level -- the high-tech work earles. he was in favor of more illegal aliens to be a flexible labor force, believe it or not. the architect of a meltdown who provided subprime mortgages for illegal aliens. he said, first, skilled workers and their families form new house holds, they will in necessity move into vacant housing units the current glut of which is depressing the prices of american homes. what we have -- let's bring them in so we can raise the value of houses to help the banking

industry. these were homes in foreclosure because americans are unemployed. then he comes up with statement. i want everybody in the university to understand that people mostly go to college to get a better future, get a career. that's why my kids are in college. my oldest boy is an engineer. he said something that blew my mind. he said greatly expanding our quotas for the highly skilled would lower wage premiums of skilled over the lesser skilled. skill shortages in america exist because we're shielding out shield labor sources from competition. quotas are substituted for the wage pricing mechanism and the process we've created a privileged elite. a pried elite. comes supported at noncompetitively high levels by immigration quotas eliminating such restrictions would reduce some of our income in equality. now think about it, mark, he's

saying if you can flood the market with engineers and technicians, you could slash the wages so that people with no skills wouldn't make that much less than people with skills or education. this is about the destruction of the middle class. this is about the destruction of incentives for kids to go to universities. it makes absolutely no sense, but if you're motivated purely by the bottom line -- the guy who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing -- then i guess your name is alan greenspan. >> do you concur with that statement in do you agree with that, congressman? >> absolutely. i have four daughters who went to school and my old -- my second daughter, actually, is an engineer as well. >> is that right? >> and i asked her did she feel there was a shortage of engineers? and i think we're selling out our children. rather than look around the world and say we need more engineers or we need more

high-skilled workers, why don't we invest in our own kids. why are we slamming the door on our own children to hunt around the country for cheaper labor to do the higher skills. >> do we have a criteria with legal immigration that says that if you want to come into this country, you're either coming in because you bring a skill, or you're fleeing for political or religious persecution. do we have a skill set that we say, you know what? we need this or that. if they come from a country that possesses that, medical, engineering, whatever, they can -- they can advance or fast track their way to legal immigration because they provide a skill. do we do that here? >> yeah, we do. here's the point -- there's a lot of fraud because we're not investigating it. we hear about how many border patrol agents -- >> fraud? >> we know how many border patrol agents are, about 20,000 now, right, lou? >> 20,000 for the country. 55,000 police officers in new

york. >> yeah. and we have 7,000 i.c.e. agents doing interior enforcement and more than half of them are doing customs work. so to police the immigration system from the interior, we've got about 3,000 agents. you probably have a better chance of buying a winning lottery ticket than getting arrested for violating immigration status if you're an illegal alien. understand something, we're told there's no legal way for people to immigrate. you know every year more than a million aliens are ginn a green card and placed on the pathway of united states citizenship. we are admitting more authorized foreign workers each month than the number of new jobs that we're creating. >> okay. so -- >> think about that. >> can i come at this at a different angle? if we could grow the economy by having the government get out of the way and having the private sector to develop new businesses, couldn't we create mechanisms to absorb these people who are now in our

country? going the other way. could you -- rather than punishing these people, could we make a way to make them contributors by coming to -- >> here's the problem, and i didn't mean to step on you. i won't read you the quote. but if you look at the 9/11 commission report. i gave testimony to the 9/11 commission, immigration fraud was the number one tax of choice the ability to hide in plain sight for the aliens. so by saying that if you're here illegally now, we're going to make you a productive member of society, we don't know who you are. if you're going to go back to the grounds for excluding an alien, why would someone evade the inspections process? well, it's really only known to them. but you have to presume they belong to one or more categories of excludable aliens. my concern is -- in fact, look what happened in boston. i don't want someone to say, oh, this is terrible. political asylum, people suffering -- i'm well aware my family decimated in the

holocaust as a high school kid and i went to president johnson to let minorities come to america as refugees. i'm a big fan of it. but there's no integrity to the process. if you look at the boston terrorist act on april 15 -- not making accusations, but the tsarnaev family got political asylum. if we legalize them, what do they do? they went back to russia? so we don't even know who's here or what brought them here and you have a president giving hundreds of thousands of dreamers identity documents. you know what the interview process is? there is no interview. it's done purely on paper. you mail in your paperwork. if all of the boxes are checked and a couple of pieces of paper are there, bang, there's the identity. >> is that true? >> it's absolutely true. i asked the homeland security

secretary that. will there be face-to-face criminal background checks and interviews with the illegal immigrants, the 11 million people. i knew what the answer is. i know what's involved in a criminal background check. there's not just looking at a piece of paper or a document. and the answer is no. and my question to her then was, you know, we know that illegal aliens used fraudulent documents to get around this country. if we're not going back to the country of origin and we're not finding out the history, how do you know what terrorists we are now granting citizenship to? and i remember one case in hazleton, we arrested a guy for selling crack cocaine. another one on a playground. it took our detectives five hours to determine who he was. he had five social security cards. we don't know -- law enforcement doesn't know who we're dealing wit

with. with what's happening in syria, mike, you made a good point earlier, we're trying to make sure we are protecting the best interest of the american people first. i don't know if we're doing that. and i believe it's more for political reasons than what's in the best interest of the american people. >> okay, i should have asked you this before. we're going come to the audience next. a question for the two guests, raise your hands? shaun and clinton are going to come through the audience with microphones and ask questions of them next. who was your governor? tom ridge or ed rendell? did he blow you off to be direct? when you said i have this going on, i need help? >> i couldn't get help from the governor, washington, i couldn't get help from anyone. no one wanted to hear this. the governor's race was going on

at this time and i couldn't get any potential governor candidates to come and look at what was happening and why i was doing what i was doing. nobody wanted to touch this issue. they didn't want to go near us because it's such a political hot potato. >> i remember when you decided to run for congress, that's a huge fundraising thing to get you elected. there are people still mad about the lawsuit. what was that like when you were running? because you ran a spirited campaign. we had you on our show. i know sean hannity had you on on television. how many people came out when you ran for congress? >> well, i did have a lot of support. but the support came from around the country. >> yeah. >> and that's when i realized that this wasn't something that was just -- was not a parochial issue in hazleton. i realize small towns all around this country were crumbling under the weight of illegal

immigration. i remember testifying before senator kennedy and senator specter and was in philadelphia on the panel testing was myself, mayor bloomberg, and police commissioner from philadelphia a johnson at the time. i didn't know how people felt about it. i wanted to campaign in my town. when i went there, they were picketing me in philadelphia. they weren't able to put the face with the name. i went inside. when i went in there, an audience like this had t-shirts made up that did not support me. backstage, they asked, how did they feel it? no, not with you, senator specter, police commissioner johnson? no. i realized i was the meal for

this hearing. >> i sat there. mayor bloomberg opened and he went on to say he felt that new york city's economy would crash if they didn't have illegal immigrants because he asked who would wash our dishes, who would bus our tables, who would clean our hotel rooms. that was the match to my fuse. i tell you who will do it? that single mom will do it. and that high school dropout will do it. maybe new york city's economy would crash if you didn't have illegal immigrants, but small towns around this country are crashing because of it. and i realized that i did strike the nerve around the country with people who understood what illegal immigration does to smalltown america. >> i just have to say this. you're raising one of the guys that drives me nuts. that's bloomberg. this is serious. he joked a number of times he went nuts about six months ago and was all over the headlines

in new york city. he wanted the bronx district attorney to go out and lock up anybody who would dare trespass in public housing. he said trespassers are dangerous. and just a couple of weeks ago, the headline was he wants anybody who lives in public housing to be fingerprinting. he said i'm certain people who live in public housing want someone to ask people who are wandering around, who are you and why are you here? you know what struck a note? that's the kind of question i used to ask as an immigration inspector when foreigners would visit the united states -- who are you. why are you here? a mayor that goes nuts about trespassing in public housing but nothing wrong with trespassing in america and wants to provide them with a key to the city, what an incredible disconnect. >> okay. >> just so everybody knows, we actually set this up six months

ago. >> yes. >> michael and i were talking and congressman barletta signed off on it. the top aide was here. we were talking about this six months ago. there's a vote in the house coming up right away on the immigration issue. i take it you're going vote no? >> the house is not expected to go for it. the senate did. >> i'm trying to do all i can to stop the vote. >> stop the vote? >> i want to see border security first. we shouldn't talk about anything else until we secure our borders. i like to say, mark, you wouldn't replace your carpet at home if you still had a hole in the roof. let's fix the roof first and then we'll have a discussion, what do we do with everyone else. >> let's go to the audience now. a question up front. this is former representative fred costello, the former mayor. good evening, thanks for being with us. >> thank you for being here.

there's an article -- can illegal immigrants practice law? it pits state's right against the federal government. i'm a state's right guy. but in this case, i want to read part of the paragraph. in the california case, the state is arguing they have no license to practice law. the federal law cited by the justice department prohibits states from providing illegal immigrants with public benefits unless states pass laws to the contrary. this implies that it can't give any public benefits unless the states have passed laws to allow that such as california evidently allowing illegals to practice law which is going to their supreme court. so my question is, are you aware of any states that have passed laws that give public benefits to illegal aliens and if they have, why have they done that and how can the federal

government overrule that illegal is illegal? >> illegal is illegal. you certainly get that. that is the magnet that draws so many illegal immigrants to america -- they can take jobs away from american workers and they can get benefits. if we take away the magnet, we take away the jobs, and we stop giving benefits to people who are in the country illegally, many, the reason they're here wouldn't be here. they would simply go home on their own. yes, we do receive federal benefits. medicare, social security, there's no question about it. we have an administration right now that's using prosecutorial discretion which i believe is unconstitutional base icalicall denying any kind of enforcing immigration laws to people who are in the country illegally. i give a place back home, a

little borough next to the city of hazleton, the chief of police stopped a young man for speeding through the borough. when he got there, the man couldn't speak english, they got a translator, four hours. they held up the police officer during that time. the man admits that he's in the country illegally for six years living in hazleton. he didn't know his address. he didn't have a job. he had $3,000 cash in his pocket, and he had two public benefit access cards with his name spelled differently on each card. obviously he was committing fraud. they called i.c.e. i.c.e. said let him go. let him go. this is what infuriates the american public. people who go to the store, not asking anything from the government. they're not getting anything. they're struggling to take care of their family and they see somebody with their cart overfilled using multiple access

cards. it. >> the administration. it's washington creating this problem. >> if you have people living in your town and you don't know who they are, they are a threat. you know what a terrorist does the day before he participates in an attack, he goes to the job where he's been hiding in plain sight. if you aid, abet, harbor, shield an alien from the federal government, you're committing a felony under the immigration laws. sanctuary cities are guilty of that. but under this administration in what i call prosecutorial deception, this is going on. not to this extent. it was a problem. why should anyone come legally. if you're going to go to the movies, there's three lanes, easy pass, cash, or free.

why would you go through anything other than the free lane and no one knows who you are. it's crazy, isn't it? >> back to the audience. >> congress member barleta, what are your thoughts on the american citizens who knowingly hire illegal immigrants and would rather hire an illegal immigrant for a lower wage than hire the starving widow. >> we know for a fact that illegal immigration diminishes the wages of the american worker. there are 22 million americans as i said who could not find work this morning. and that's why when we crafted the law in hazleton, it went after the employers that were knowingly hiring illegal aliens, illegal workers. because it is already illegal to hire illegal workers. we weren't creating a new law, we were going to restrict the business license of any business

that did that. that is the magnet that brings so many in illegally is offering jobs. we know for a fact -- one time people were asking me as mayor, why are republicans in washington not doing anything about illegal immigration. i used to say the democrats are looking for the vote and the republicans wanted the cheap labor for business. then i got to washington and i realized i was wrong -- they're both looking for the vote. we need to make sure we're protecting the american worker first. that's what michael taught me, the immigration laws are there nor the first place, to protect national security and american jobs. >> is it a great time of year to make that point. unfortunately 9/11 memorial. 12 years now. it took 44 months to win the second world war. over 20 years ago, we were attacked by middle eastern

terrorists who gamed the visa process and the immigration benefits program. and, in fact, on 9/11, there were 26 visa waiver countries, we now have 37 visa waiver countries as we approach the 12th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack committed on the soil. i hate to imagine the current bunch of supposed leaders that were behind the failure were in charge of our country in the second world war, what would have happened. >> a former prosecutor with the state attorney's office. he's public defender. he joins us now for the town hall speakers event. thanks. >> thank you, mark. thank you for being here. this is enlightening. congressman barleta, you just touched on something i asked about. cheap labor and votes of new citizens are two prime reasons but that seems cynical to some extent. can you explain the various agendas that you've had to confront that support illegal immigration in addition to the -- to the question about

labor and votes? >> well, i think, you know, most elected officials that take a position of supporting illegal immigrati immigration, their defense usually comes to these are people who just want a better life. they want to take care of their families. and they paint the picture of just a family that is here for -- for all of the right reasons of why you would want to come to america. now that's true. there are many who come here just like that. there's no question about it. but i see a different side as a mayor unfortunately. i saw the victim's side of illegal immigration. many times they don't like to talk about that. i remember talking in a town hall in the middle of the state of pennsylvania. and i talked about having compassion for the victims

because many times people would accuse me of not having compassion for the illegal immigrant. i have a lot of compassion, but i have a lot of compassion for innocent victims. when i got done speaking, the young couple came to me and the father told me he drove an hour to hear me speak and he wanted to tell me about his daughter. his daughter's name was carle snyder, 20 years old, studying to be a veterinarian. her next door neighbor was an illegal alien arellsed in houston, he feels from honduras. let go -- a sanctuary city -- let go, comes to pennsylvania. the father is telling me the story, tears start rolling down his cheek. the man broke down to my daughter's house and stabbed carle 37 times she. had multiple knife wounds in the palms of her hands as he tried to defend herself as well as knife wounds on the back. she bled to death on the kitchen floor. he said i came here to shake your hand because you're

speaking with carle. any time people paint a picture of a nice family looking for a nice life, i think of mr. snyder and carle. they were victims and we shouldn't ignore that. >> back to the audience. your question for our guest. >> how many illegal aliens are getting access to voting? >> you know? >> we really don't know. you know what? i know of investigations that were being conducted by agents that one way or the other were shut down -- shut down. there are two quick points i want to make. i physically deported a guy by the name of reynaldo rayside, a panamanian drug dealer. we're speaking of different people from around the country -- this is not about mexico or latinos. this is one of the lies being perpetrated. it's about people -- it's about making a distinction about citizens versus aliens. you say the word aliens, people

gasps and people want to fanlt. it's not a pejorative, it's not an insult. it's just any person who's not a citizen. that's not my definition, that's in the immigration act. the problem with that word is it provides clarity to the debate. and the other side doesn't want clarity. it's a magic act. going back to reynaldo rayside, we fitzically deported them. i was the guy who put him on an airplane, signed the warrant of deportation. he got back to the united states unbeknownst to us because not once but twice he was arrested by the new york city police department because mayor giuliani's sanctuary policies, we were never notified. the third time he encountered a police officer. he reached for the gun, bullets flew, the cop was killed. i testified at the murder trial. i inadvertently met his daughter but he never met because his wife was pregnant at the time he feels killed. this is not victimless.

we are allowing america to be the safe valve, the escape valve for places like mexico. there are many decent hardworking folks from mexico who could do anything if they can stay home with their families and be successful. they can't. there's an oligarchy in power and we empower them. and today it would seem to me that america is looking to mexico as the role model other than the other way around, the idea of being fabulously wealthy beyond the wildest dreams or being very poor. we're told if we don't import foreign entrepreneurs, we're screwed, people like gates and zuckerburg who themselves were entrepreneurs born in america. i find it disconnect, mind boggling. >> do either of you have any knowledge at a time in an election, local, state, or national impacted by an illegal alien vote. i know of nothing. do any of you suspect it? >> it's nearly impossible to --

to determine whether or not -- >> there are newspaper articles, anecdotal. sour grapes on the part of the loser. but we know it happens. it's against the law even for a lawful immigrant to vote on anything other than a school board election but with no integrity to the process. i felt so strongly about the voter i.d. requirement. i was on with neil cavuto. how is this voter suppression. if you're poor, you don't pay for the i.d. if you're poor, you're going to receive public assistance which requires an i.d. to hear this nonsense about, well this, is about voter suppression? no, it's integrity of the process that sets the fundamental basis for the american public. >> your question for our guest? >> for the congressman, there seems to be an upsurge of political asylum requests at tijuana, there's a major problem.

i'm being facetious. but the whole system seems to be stacked against enforcement and just giving benefits away and we could keep working and paying for these benefits. are there active groups that we could contribute to if we're so inclined to fight this? i know it was a lonely battle for you, congressman, as mayor. but is there something that can be done at the local level rather than waiting for federal action which seems to never come. and -- >> i think it's, you know, something any time anyone is going to go to a ballot box and vote for someone to be an elected official, state, local, county level, or federal level, you need to know where they stand on the issue and whether or not they're willing to do something about it. there are many members that i have that i work with, steve king, louie gomer, michelle

bachmann, many members who understand what illegal immigration is doing and the fact that it touches on so many other issues. it's not one issue. i remember when i was running for congress, they would say you ear a one issue guy. that tells me you don't even understand that one issue. that touches so many other issues. so, i believe you need to look at your elected officials. fair is a group that also -- i work with a lot on illegal immigration. speak at many of their events. you need to look at the candidate and determine whether or not they have the courage to stand up. it's not a popular position in an election time. you're going be called a lot of names. >> this is not a new issue, by the way. how many in the audience remember a congressman named duncan hunter. his son, now, is in that seat. he ran -- he had this as an

issue. you mentioned tom tancredo. >> and i work on his organization, caps, californians for population stabilization. they do a lot of writing. there are some groups but the problem is the lion's share of the money is going to the other side. i did a peace for social contract which is a quarterly magazine and i compiled a list that literally and figuratively are making out like bandits. by the way, an insidious form of plo filing to talk about the mythical latino vote or the black vote. if your last name is goldstein, that's all i need to know about you. when police profile, there's situational stuff involved. when you can look at someone's last name and say that's all i need to know, it's a disgusting form of profiling. that's insulting to folks because, you know, we're not monolithic. and it's like saying those people. it happens every day of the week, doesn't it? >> besides -- if i could go back, besides there, another group is numbers usa.

you may have heard of them. two groups that ith since i was mayor of hazleton? >> going back to the audience. a question back there. then we're going come over here. good evening and welcome. thank you, your question for our guests? >> i have a question for the congressman. what are your plans with those who are born here but have yet to reach an adequate age to take care of themselves. >> that's a real -- that's going to be a difficult debate we're going to have. talking about the dreamers as they're so-called. is that what you're talking about? >> born here or brought here. >> born here. >> born here or brought here. >> if you're born here, you're a citizen. not talking about those who are born here. >> parents who are here illegally? just for clarification? >> yes. >> they're citizens. if you're born in this country -- >> your parents are foreign --

>> i would make a suggestion. there's a term used that i don't like. it's referred to as the anchor baby. i don't like that term to be honest with you. but what i would like to see is the 14th amendment is presently interpreted said you're born here, you're a citizen. but perhaps what should happen is if you are born to an illegal alien, then you would not have the authority though give lawful status to the parents that has a child here. that might be a good halfway ground to turn off a big part of the magnet. we have birth tourism also. not just from mexico. you have people coming from asia doing the same thing. so perhaps the solution okay, fine, the law says you're born here, you're a citizen, but you cannot petition for the parents to become a resident in their own right when you become 21. does that answer your question, i hope? does that answer your question? okay. thank you. let's go back -- now here's sean with another question. >> what steps should be taken to

prevent social profiling in the immigration laws. >> we were very specific in the hazleton law when it was written to make sure that racial from filing could not be part of any of the enforcement. in fact, it's written in the law that it cannot be based -- and this is a business that knowingly hires or a landlord and this is a part that really we were concerned with -- landlords simply not hiring someone or not renting to someone because of the color of their skin. and we took it out of the hands of both the business and the landlords in our ordinance. in the business portion, to make sure that racial profiling was not used, we would -- if you used e-verify, which is a free program, federal program over the internet, that will

determine if a person is a lawful worker or not, if you use e-verify, you're not in violation of the ordinance. the landlords, again, we did not want someone not renting to someone based on the language that they spoke or the color of the skin. so the landlord would send someone to city hall for a permit. the city hall worker, again, would not make the determination. we would use the data base -- the same data base they would use for social security or federal programs to determine whether or not that person is in the country illegally. so we took it out of the hands of the business and the landlords so they would not profile and say i'm not going to rent or hire someone based because they may be here illegally because of the color of the skin or the language they speak. out of their hands and put it in the hands of the federal government and only the federal government would make that determination. no city employee nor landlord would make that and that was

clear in our ordinance so racial profiling would not be part of it. >> moving through and to the audience now. your question for our guest? >> can you find, congressman, that ignoring these laws that illegal is illegal that it tends to be a crumbling of the entire american system. to pick your officials correctly. and sometimes the elected officials think that the law doesn't matter that they can just do whatever they like. do you find that? >> one of the first bills i used in congress was to punish sanctuary cities to take away federal money to any mayor that declares itself a sanctuary city. a mayor does not have the authority to pick and choose what laws they like and what laws they don't. this country was built on the rule of law. the fact that we have elected officials whether it's from a president to a mayor deciding

whether or not they're going enforce laws will be the beginning of the crumbling of this country. >> i thought the question was asked of you. but just two things. to me, i call open borders folks the information anarchist. it's what it is. it's not anti-immigrant to be pro-american. you take care of your own first. when a parent runs into a burning building and there's lots of kids in the building, you expect they're going to grab their own child first. we expect the country will look out for their own citizen first. it's not unreasonable. think about this. the first set of laws that foreign nationals generally encounter are the immigration laws. we have the whole world convinced that today violations of our laws will not only go unnoticed but will be rewarded. if that's the kind of face that you want to provide to the world, then god help us all. >> in the front here, your question. good evening? >> i knew you guys were going to be here. i had to come down.

i appreciate you. my question is about amnesty. you mentioned congressman steve king and others that you worked with. and i know the main stream media is giving him some grief about some things he said particularly about the dream act and it basically giving am else inty to drug dealers. drug traffickers. do you agree with that? do you think the media should be attacking him? is it fair? >> it became radioactive after i said that. >> not to me. i know what's in steve king's heart. i don't think anybody could deny that some of the people that will be getting amnesty are drug dealers. some are criminals. >> some are terrorists. >> some are terrorists. some are very nice people. but why should we be afraid -- why should we be afraid to

single out those that will be mixed in with the am else inty of -- that will -- that are here to do harm, whether it be selling drugs or trying to encourage our children to join gangs, gang members, gang bangers. >> look at my boy who got am else inty as a worker as part of the '86 am else inty that chuck schumer authored. he was involved in the '9 bombing at the world trade center. if we don't know who you are and we give you an identity document, that's a problem. even with the dreamers -- we're told it's about children but the age cutoff is 31. i'm on the wrong side of 60, but i think of 31 as being young, but a child? in what society? so the problem we have is we don't even up know if somebody came here three weeks ago and claimed to have gotten here 16 years ago. there's a lack of beg integrity

to a system that provides lawful status but identity documents. go back to the 9/11 commission report, look it up, it's on-line. 19 terrorists used over 300 false identities when some governments on the local or state level provided identity documents to people without being able to verify their identity, they're creating a national security nightmare for all of us. >> when we talk about amnesty, we look back to 1986 when ronald reagan gave amnesty to what was -- to be 1.5 million, turned out to be almost 4 million because as soon as you wave the carrot of citizenship, people will storm into the country illegally, he promised the american people it would be a one-time deal. we would secure our borders and never do it again. here we are, 2013, they're talking about am else inty

again. it's over 11 million, could be 20 million, who knows? 20 million, 30 million. and our borders are still not secured. fool me once. >> let me ask you -- with the borders having all of the security of a screen door, you going to seek re-election? >> am i going to -- >> to congress. do you intend to? >> absolutely. >> in that chair sat ron desantos a few months ago. he's a freshman congressman. i think he served with you on committee if i'm not mistaken. what do you think of him? >> he's a good baseball player, i know that. >> he shared some of your values, did he not? >> he does. i had an opportunity to know ron very well. he's a freshman. i'm vocal about where i stand and i'm sure ron will have a chance to stand up for what he

believes. >> precious minutes left. back to the audience. >> thank you for coming this evening. this is interesting and informative. i'm in the contract labor business. i provide temporary labor to high-tech companies. about a third of the people we employ are people who are brought here on h-1-b visas. and i think that is something that we don't want to throw o out -- throw the baby out with the bath water. there's not enough of those people graduating to fill all of the jobs that are available in this country. and what's happened is that a lot of it is going offshore to india and other places where they have labor so -- >> good question. >> so i think we have to think about not so much the low-end labor but high-end labor, how we

treat that. because in my business, we would be out of business if we didn't have those people available. >> if i could help. we're running out of town. on the h-1-b visa program, gentleman raises a point. is it sunset or altered? >> if you think about whether or not we're educating our own children. rather than looking around the world -- >> [ participant off mic ] >> right. but here's the other part of the problem, though, if we're not doing investigations to make certain that there's not fraud involved and there have been many cases and videos out there if you reach me to michaelcutler.net, i'll send it to you where you have attorneys coaching other lawyers on how to game the system so they can get their fees by bringing in foreign workers. went through the bank thashlgs's where the money was. let the companies go to india because that's where cheap labor is, we have to be careful not to

undermine the american middle class and the american dream. >> the point of bringing in a higher skilled person versus a lower skilled person is obviously -- >> [ participant off-mic ] >> do we have the microphone so the gentleman can be heard? >> if you don't have the labor available in this country -- >> we're agreeing with you. >> going to the offshore. >> i agree with you on that. but we have to make sure that the system has integrity. that's the bottom line for the entire immigration system is the lack of integrity. you don't want someone to cut you off on the highway and say where did you get your license. my question is where did you get the green card? i want to make sure that the system has integrity. >> to bring it to a close, we're running out of time. i realize there are many out there. sum rise if you will, briefly, for our audience, what do you see happening? what's the end game on this? what do you see in reality happening with michael cutler? >> well, i'm hoping that people like lou and lou is one of my heroes in washington. it's a short list, will prevail.

i hope the american people in listening in this program and watching it will reach out to their elected representatives and demand true representation to make sure that the government serves "we the people" because that's who this government is for. so i'm hopeful as more people understand the dire straits that we're in that we understand that importing more foreign workers in the number of jobs we create each month adds to unemployment, underemployment in record levels. we're in a 34-year high of underemployment. all of this can be dealt with effectively if we only had the moral fiber to not just secure borders but to enforce immigration laws. i appreciate what you're doing, lou? >> congressman? >> at the end of the day, i hope what we do in washington will be to help the american worker. i hope that we enforce our immigration laws so that we can help the immigrants that come to america for an opportunity.

because i believe we're stealing the opportunity that america offers by bringing in many millions of illegal workers. and at the end of the day, i believe that -- i hope that what he with -- what we do in washington will be in the national best interest of the american people and not what's in the best interest of our national party. >> we do not operate in a vacuum when we do the speaker events. very quickly, i want to thank some people. without them, these efforts do not happen. dean inzio, richard weekley, michael milsep, clinton orrin and sean polk, bob score, kenny tv. our radio studio at wndb and c-span partners tonight, phil dean, gary sullivan, andre fontana, and bob self, i believe i have all of that. and tony marks who makes sure everything gets moved and our

host john p. johnson of embry riddle. our next event happens on september 23. we'll take a look at leadership. it will be september 23, former air force instructor pilot will talk about "remarkable courage -- a systemized strategy of success." we invite you to have all students come who wants to succeed in business to hear this story. on behalf of our guests tonight, we want to thank congressman lou barletta, michael cutler, thank you for being with us tonight. ladies and gentlemen, thank you for listening. thank you for watching. have a pleasant evening.

>> this week on "q&a," pulitzer prize-winning author a. scottberg discusses "wilson." >> a. scott berg, in your 818-page book on woodrow wilson, you start it all. you wrote it all in the first paragraph this way -- dawn broke that day on a new epic, one that would carry the