my question is for mr. osuna. there's a lot of argument in the national security circles garding the voters. do you think that argument at the end of the day will win? for people who think you have to secure the borders, what ever it is. >> ok. there is a question behind him. actually, over here. >> i am from colorado. >> you came along with for this forum. >> the first question is for mr. osuna. you mention the criteria for the new immigration reform. is it an extension of the 1996 reform in many ways? you mentioned border control, job identification, and you know. one of the features of that immigrati reform in 1996 was it open the door to what we are seeing -- it opened the door to what we are seeing today in arizona. it allowed the state governments, it was an option for the state's to enter into immigration policies. so now the government responds to arizona with the supremacy clause. do you think -- one of the criteria you use has to do with allowing for more internal control. is that not a way of extending

my question is for mr. osuna. there's a lot of argument in the national security circles regarding the voters. do you think that argument at the end of the day will win? for people who think you have to secure the borders, what ever it is. >> ok. there is a question behind him. actually, over here. >> i am from colorado. >> you came along with for this forum. >> the first question is for mr. osuna. you mention the criteria for the new immigration reform. is it an extension of the 1996 reform in many ways? you mentioned border control, job identification, and you know. one of the features of that immigration reform in 1996 was it open the door to what we are seeing -- it opened the door to what we are seeing today in arizona. it allowed the state governments, it was an option for the state's to enter into immigration policies. so now the government responds to arizona with the supremacy clause. do you think -- one of the criteria you use has to do with allowing for more internal control. is that not a way of extend

my question is for mr. osuna. there's a lot of argument in the national security circles regarding the voters. do you think that argument at the end of the day will win? for people who think you have to secure the borders, what ever it is. >> ok. there is a question behind him. actually, over here. >> i am from colorado. >> you came along with for this forum. >> the first question is for mr. osuna. you mention the criteria for the new immigration reform. is it an extension of the 1996 reform in many ways? you mentioned border control, job identification, and you know. one of the features of that immigration reform in 1996 was it open the door to what we are seeing -- it opened the door to what we are seeing today in arizona. it allowed the state governments, it was an option for the state's to enter into immigration policies. so now the government responds to arizona with the supremacy clause. do you think -- one of the criteria you use has to do with allowing for more internal control. is that not a way of extend