Log in

Where I stand

Bob Deppe’s letter (Senate debate) goes to great lengths to distort my positions and it is important voters get the facts from me, not a John Kavanagh supporter.

Deppe wrote I was “100 percent against E-Verify.” Not true. I wholeheartedly support punishing businesses that break our immigration laws. What I said was “I support the bipartisan (Senate) commission’s recommendation for comprehensive immigration reform. Securing the border is important. I support a safe, legal way of entry for workers that we need in the country to drive the economy. I also believe that it is unfair to punish businesses with E-Verify when we don’t have a way to bring workers into the country so they can run their businesses.”

The point is businesses that have carefully followed the rule of law should have “safe harbor” from prosecution if the E-Verify system fails to catch an illegal worker. The U.S. Supreme Court agrees and said so in their SB1070 decision. My opponent doesn’t agree. Why? Because he’s not a businessman.

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers starting at $5 for your first month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already have an account? Log in to continue.

Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

Please log in to continue

Log in
I am anchor

Where I stand

Posted

Bob Deppe’s letter (Senate debate) goes to great lengths to distort my positions and it is important voters get the facts from me, not a John Kavanagh supporter.

Deppe wrote I was “100 percent against E-Verify.” Not true. I wholeheartedly support punishing businesses that break our immigration laws. What I said was “I support the bipartisan (Senate) commission’s recommendation for comprehensive immigration reform. Securing the border is important. I support a safe, legal way of entry for workers that we need in the country to drive the economy. I also believe that it is unfair to punish businesses with E-Verify when we don’t have a way to bring workers into the country so they can run their businesses.”

The point is businesses that have carefully followed the rule of law should have “safe harbor” from prosecution if the E-Verify system fails to catch an illegal worker. The U.S. Supreme Court agrees and said so in their SB1070 decision. My opponent doesn’t agree. Why? Because he’s not a businessman.

Mr. Deppe, a Kavanagh donor, correctly states that I switched parties after being a Republican for 30 years, and I remain a fiscal conservative. But he states I did not give “definitive positions on the state budget,” when, in fact, I did. I clearly stated that I would not support nor vote to raise taxes.

Deppe claims I was asked “four times” to provide an example of “small government” that is promoted by the Democratic Party and could not cite a single example. Wrong again. In fact, I provided several examples, including that Democrats won’t use government to regulate women’s bodies or limit their access to health care.

If voters want to learn about my positions, they can visit Facebook, my website, or email me. Questions are welcome from any LD23 voter.

Share with others


Have an opinion on this story? Click here to send a letter to our editors.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here