>> THIS WEEK ON TO THE CONTRARY... FIRST, DIVERSE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS LEAD THE GUN CONTROL DEBATE BUT IN A DESTRUCTIVE DIRECTION?

THEN DONALD TRUMP'S CANDIDACY AND A NATION DIVIDED ABOUT IMMIGRATION.

[♪♪♪] CALLED THE SIT-IN A SETBACK.

SHE SAID THE SIT-IN DIMINISHED BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR HER GUN CONTROL COMPROMISE BILL FELL EIGHT VOTES SHORT WHEN SHE TRIED TO BRING IT TO THE SENATE FLOOR.

170 HOUSE DEMOCRATS STAGED THE DEMOCRATS TO FORCE A VOTE WITH NO LUCK.

JUST ABOUT ANY GUN CONTROL BILL WOULD FAIL IN THE REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED HOUSE.

BUT SPEAKER PAUL RYAN WILL NOT ALLOW A VOTE.

A RECENT CNN POLL FINDS 90% OF THE PUBLIC SUPPORTS TIGHTER BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR GUN BUYERS, 58% OF WOMEN FAVOR STRICTER GUN CONTROL LAWS.

60% OF WOMEN FAVORED A BAN ON ASSAULT WEAPONS VERSUS 48% OF MEN.

>> WHY ARE DIVERSE LAWMAKERS MORE LIKELY TO FAVOR GUN CONTROL?

>> WELL, I THINK BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE DEMOCRATS AND DEMOCRATS ARE NOT STRONG SUPPORTERS OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

>> AND IT'S ALSO BECAUSE THEY ARE LIKELY TO REPRESENT THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THEY DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTING GUN CONTROLS.

>> WHETHER YOU ARE A REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT I THINK DIVERSE INDIVIDUALS HAVE THAT PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE OF GANG VIOLENCE AND DRUG VIOLENCE.

SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS A POLITICAL THING.

I THINK WE WANT TO SUPPORT THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND STATEMENT HAVE THAT SENSITIVITY.

>> THERE ARE ALREADY MANY DIVERSE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FROM URBAN DISTRICTS WHERE THE TOLL OF GUN VIOLENCE IS MUCH MORE APPARENT AND THEY ARE HEARING MUCH MORE URGENCY FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS.

>> I'M CURIOUS, OBVIOUSLY THIS WAS YOU KNOW, A BIT OF A PUBLICITY STUNT BY THE DEMOCRATS.

>> NO.

>> PAUL RYAN.

WAIT A SECOND.

PAUL RYAN SAID THAT ON THE HOUSE FLOOR AND SHOWED THE REQUEST FOR DONATIONS THAT WENT OUT.

A TRICK BY THE WAY, THAT I GET IT FROM BOTH SIDES.

I'VE SEEN THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> ELECTION YEAR.

>> AND REPUBLICANS DO THEM, TOO, IN FAIRNESS SO I THOUGHT IT WAS A LITTLE WEIRD.

HE SHOULD HAVE SAID WAIT A MINUTE WE DO THIS BUT THEY ARE DOING IT.

BUT, BUT, THERE ARE 81,000 PEOPLE ON THE NO-FLY LIST ONLY 1,000 AMERICANS.

THAT IS A TINY FRACTION.

WHY, WHY DOES IT MATTER SO MUCH TO THE NRA AND REPUBLICANS TO PROTECT 1,000 AMERICANS?

MANY TIMES THAT MANY HAVE DIED AT THE HANDS OF ASSAULT WEAPONS?

>> I THINK WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT ANYBODY'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WHETHER IT'S ONE PEOPLE OR 10,000 PEOPLE BUT THAT ASIDE BECAUSE THIS GOES TO THE HEART OF IT THE DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE DID NOT ALLOW WHAT YOU TALKED ABOUT SUSAN COLLINS BILL TO GET ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

THE IF THE DEMOCRATS.

>> THE DEMOCRATS?

>> IF THE DEMOCRATS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE OVERALL GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION KEEP IN MIND BACK WHEN NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE AND DEMOCRATS RAN THE CONGRESS AND THE HOUSE AND GUN VIOLENCE WAS AT A HIGHER LEVEL THAN TODAY, NANCY PELOSI DID NOT GET GUN CONTROL THROUGH THE CONGRESS.

THIS IS MORE POLITICS RIGHT NOW THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD HAVE THE DISCUSSION BUT IT IS NOT A PROPER RESPONSE TO WHAT HAPPENED IN ORLANDO IF YOU WANT TO FIGHT TERRORISM THERE ARE STRONGER THINGS THAN GOING AGAINST GUN CONTROL.

>> THE UNITED STATES IS NOT UNLIKE THE REST OF THE WORLD AND SIMILAR COUNTRIES HAVE RESPONDED WITH GUN CONTROL LAWS THAT ARE EFFECTIVE.

IN 1999 THE MAJORITY OF GUN OWNERS SAID I WANT MY GUNS BECAUSE I WANTING TO HUNTING AND IN 2016 THEY WANT TO BE PROTECTED.

PROTECTED BY WHOM?

THE OTHER FACT THAT IS REALLY INTERESTING IS THERE IS A LESSER NUMBER OF GUN OWNERS NOW THERE'S 37% OF AMERICANS THAT OWN GUNS BUT THEY OWN MORE GUNS THAN BEFORE.

SO IT'S ALMOST LIKE WE ARE CREATING THIS ARMY OF PEOPLE THAT ARE FIGHTING SOMEONE AND PROTECTING THEMSELVES FROM SOMEONE AND AS YOU SAID ABOUT DIVERSE LAWMAKERS AND URBAN CENTERS WE ARE FEELING THE PEOPLE ARE ARMING THEMSELVES TO PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM US.

IT IS A SCARY SITUATION.

AND FOR THE REPUBLICANS TO TAKE THIS EXTREME POSITIONS THAT YOU CANNOT EVEN DO A BACKGROUND CHECK ON BAD PEOPLE ON NO-FLY LIST FROM OWNING GUNS IS OUTRAGEOUS.

>> FROM PURCHASING.

>> WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT I DO THINK SENATOR COLLINS WAS RIGHT.

THIS WAS A SETBACK SHE WAS TRYING TO BE BIPARTISAN AND AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN YOU ADD EVERYTHING UP AND LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED FOR EXAMPLE WITH AURORA AND WHAT HAPPENED WITH CHARLESTON AND SANDY HOOK THIS IS JUST WE HAVE TO DO INKENTH AND BIPARTISAN AND THE SIT-IN WAS A PUBLICITY STUNT.

IT DID DRAW A LOT OF ATTENTION.

>> I LOVED IT.

>> I'M SURE YOU DID.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE HAVE THE FLO FLY 1,000 PEOPLE IS IMPORTANT BUT TERRORISM IS CHARLESTON WAS ABOUT RACE ORLANDO AND I BELIEVE IT WAS MORE ABOUT GAYS AND IT WAS ABOUT TERRORISM ALTHOUGH HE USED THE ISIS AS AN EXCUSE.

MENTAL HEALTH.

>> BUT HE RAILED AGAINST GAY PEOPLE.

>> HE DID.

BECAUSE HE PROBABLY HAD SEXUAL IDENTITY ISSUES BUT THIS IS THE THING AND THEN YOU HAVE MENTAL ILLNESS THE VIRGINIA TECH AND THE HIGH SCHOOLS AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS.

IT'S MUCH BIGGER THAN YOU KNOW, THE NO-FLY ZONE OR THE F.B.I -- >> MOST OF THE PEOPLE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE FLO FLY LIST.

>> AND THAT IS AN EXCELLENT ARGUMENT THAN WE NEED TO DO MORE.

YES -- >> THE F.B.I.

WATCH LIST IS 2.9 MILLION PEOPLE AND THERE ARE MORE THAN 1,000 AMERICANS ON THAT.

>> AND THE VAST MAJORITY PEOPLE HAVE NO KNOWN CONNECTION TO TERRORISM.

BUT IT IS RIP FOR THE REPUBLICANS TO BE RAISING THOSE CIVIL LIBERTIES CONCERNS NOW WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN FINE TO HAVE THE PEOPLE ON THE LIST AND NOT BE ABLE TO FLY WHICH IS A MUCH BIGGER IMPOSITION ON ONE'S LIFE THAN TO OWN A GUN.

TO THE POINT ABOUT THIS BEING A PUBLICITY STUNT IT IS THAT BUT THAT IS WHAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN RESIGNED TO.

IF YOU COMPARE THIS TO THE SHUTDOWN IN 2013 THAT WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE AMERICAN PUBLIC IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO DENY HEALTHCARE TO PEOPLE.

IN THIS CASE, WE ARE HAVING THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS SUPPORTED BY THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO CLOSE BACKGROUND CHECK LOOPHOLES AND TO -- THEY ARE NOT MOVING ON THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS ALSO SUPPORTED BY A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS.

IN THIS CASE, THEY ARE TRYING TO RAISE ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS BEING OBSTRUCTED AND THEY HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO BUT TO SIT ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.

>> LOOK, THEY CAN DO MORE WHEN THEY WERE IN CHARGE BRINGING FORTH GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION BUT THEY DID NOT DO THAT.

AND NANCY PELOSI WAS IN CHARGE THEY HAD A FULL MAJORITY AND THEY DIDN'T DO IT.

>> THEY HAD TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY.

>> LIKE BARACK OBAMA DIDN'T DO ANYTHING ON IMMIGRATION WHEN HE HAD THE MAJORITIES IN CONGRESS AND PROMISED HE WAS GOING TO DO THAT.

THERE IS -- IT'S EASIER.

>> DO YOU WANT WAIT.

WAIT.

>> I WANT IMMIGRATION REFORM.

NOT WHAT BARACK OBAMA WANTS BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IMMIGRATION REFORM.

LET'S GO BACK TO TERRORISM.

IF THIS IS ABOUT TERRORISM AND YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT GUN CONTROL RELATED TO THAT, FRANCE HAS A LOT OF GUN CONTROL.

DID NOT STOP WHAT HAPPENED THAT CARNAGE THAT HAPPENED IN PARIS.

>> HOW MANY [INAUDIBLE] >> TERRORIST ATTACK AND LET'S TALK ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE.

>> IN THE U.S. >> SOME OF THAT INCLUDES SUICIDES.

GUN VIOLENCE FROM CRIME IS DOWN FROM WHERE IT WAS BEFORE AND WE HAVE MORE GUNS.

MORE PRIVATE CITIZENS OWN GUNS TODAY THAN DID 10 YEARS AGO AND GUN VIOLENCE IS DOWN.

THE PROBLEM IN THE URBAN COMMUNITIES THOSE ARE THE STRONG OVERTIME GUN CONTROLLED AREAS OF THE COUNTRY WHERE GUNS ARE BANNED AND THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT HAVE THEM ARE THE BAD GUYS.

>> CANNOT BE BANNED BY FEDERAL LAW.

LESS PEOPLE ARE OWNING GUNS.

>> CAN WE NOT AGREE THAT WHETHER THERE'S A LOCAL A CITY BAN IN EFFECT AS THERE ARE TIGHTER GUN CONTROL LAWS, BUT IT'S PERFECTLY LEGAL TO BUY I THINK, UP TO TWO HANDGUNS A MONTH YOU ARE LIMITED ONLY TO TWO HANDGUNS A MONTH IN VIRGINIA AND ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DRIVE ACROSS A TOLL-FREE BRIDGE WITH YOUR TWO HANDGUNS THAT YOU BOUGHT IN VIRGINIA THAT THAT JUST ANNIHILATES THE EFFICACY OF ANY GUN CONTROL LAW THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CAN PUT INTO EFFECT.

>> WHEN YOU HAVE CERTAIN COMMUNITIES OR STATES WHERE PEOPLE YES, CAN OWN GUNS AND PROTECT THEMSELVES YOU USUALLY HAVE CRIME GOING DOWN BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE MORE SCARED TO BREAK INTO SOMEBODY WHEN THEY KNOW THAT HOME MIGHT BE PROTECTED.

>> WAIT A SECOND.

CONGRESS BANNED NEW DATA ON -- SO THE FACT IS WE DON'T EVEN HAVE ACCURATE -- >> WE KNOW GUN VIOLENCE IS DOWN.

>> AGAIN, MY POINT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT THE DC AND CRIME HAS GONE UP WHETHER THE GUNS BUT THE POINT BEING IF THE ISSUE IS ABOUT TERRORISM THOSE RULES THE LAWS IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE MATTER.

WE HAVE WORKPLACE VIOLENCE.

HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE GET SHOT IN THE WORKPLACE EVERY YEAR.

>> AND DRUGS.

>> AND GUN CONTROL.

TALKING ABOUT GUN CONTROL.

>> WAIT.

I'M TALKING ABOUT GUN CONTROL AND I THINK GUN CONTROL IMPACTS MANY ASPECTS AND GUN CONTROL THE AMERICAN STYLE BY THE WAY, BECAUSE NOBODY IS GOING TO TAKE THE RIGHT TO OWN ARMS WEAPONS TO ANYBODY.

WHAT KIND OF GUNS AND HOW MANY GUNS AND WHO SHOULD HAVE THEM.

SO THIS IS NOT THE KIND OF LAW AT THIS MOMENT IN THIS COUNTRY THAT YOU CAN CLAIM THAT ANY COMMUNITY IS FREE OF GUNS.

ALL COMMUNITIES HAVE GUNS.

YOU CANNOT SAY THIS COMMUNITY HAS NO GUNS BUT THEY HAVE VIOLENCE.

ALL COMMUNITIES HAVE GUNS.

>> WHAT ABOUT THE SPIKE THERE IS A 9% SPIKE IN SUPPORT FOR SOME OF THE GUN CONTROLS IF YOU WILL.

AND THERE IS ALWAYS A SPIKE THERE WAS A SPIKE AFTER WATERTOWN IS THIS GOING TO HOLD?

>> LOOK, I THINK WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU SEE SPIKES BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT TO DO SOMETHING.

>> NEWTOWN U BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS AS PEOPLE START THINKING ABOUT IT AND HAVING THE DEBATE AND THEY GO WILL THIS WORK AND FIXED NEWTOWN?

AND THE ANSWER IS NONE OF THE THINGS WOULD HAVE CHANGED WHAT HAPPENED IN NEWTOWN AND YOU START SEEING THE SUPPORT FOR THE MEASURES DISSIPATE.

>> YOUR THOUGHTS?

>> I AGREE WITH THAT COMPLETELY.

I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT BACKGROUND CHECKS AND LOOK AT A WHOLE MYRIAD OF SOCIAL ISSUES AND ECONOMIC ISSUES.

AND AT THE SAME TIME PROTECTING THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

>> ALL RIGHT.

PLEASE LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK AND FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER @BONNIEERBE.

FROM GUN CONTROL TO ANOTHER EASY TOPIC IMMIGRATION.

DONALD TRUMP'S CANDIDACY ORIGINALLY TOOK OFF DUE TO A STANCE ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND AGAINST VARIOUS GROUPS OF IMMIGRANTS.

SO IT'S WORTH EXAMINING HOW HE WON 13.3 MILLION VOTES DURING THE PRIMARIES AND WHY SO MANY AMERICANS ARE ANGRY ABOUT IMMIGRATION POLICY.

A RECENT ARTICLE IN THE CONSERVATIVE NATIONAL REVIEW ON-LINE SAID QUOTE OPEN BORDERS HAVE MADE VOTERS INCREASINGLY ANGRY BECAUSE THEY REFLECT THE GROWING LAWLESSNESS OF SOCIETY AND THE WILLINGNESS OF REPUBLICANS TO CAPITULATE TO LEFTIST IDENTITY POLITICS.

THE SENSE WE ARE LOSING CONTROL OF OUR OWN COUNTRY BY THE DESIGN OF POLITICIANS IS CREATING A FURY.

END QUOTE.

SO WE WONDERED WHY THIS IS TRUE AND ASSEMBLED A PANEL OF OUR GUESTS AND ONE EXPERT ON IMMIGRATION TO TALK ABOUT WHY THIS IS THE CASE AND WHAT ROLE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY MAY BE PLAYING IN CREATING THIS SO-CALLED FURY.

SO JESSICA VAUGHAN WELCOME TO THE PANEL AND I THANK BILLY CARPENTER WHO IS WITH US FOR THE FIRST PART OF THE SHOW.

SO TELL ME YOU KNOW THIS WHY IS THIS GOING ON?

WHAT IS IT ABOUT IMMIGRATION THAT ROCKETED DONALD TRUMP TO THE TOP?

LATE THIS WEEK HE MADE ANOTHER COMMENT BECAUSE BRITAIN THE UK DECIDED TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION AND HE SAID WE ARE GOING TO SEE MORE OF THIS.

I GUESS REFERRING TO HIS OWN ELECTION THAT HE IS PREDICTING IN THE UNITED STATES.

WHY?

>> WELL, PEOPLE ARE UPSET BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL THEY DON'T FEEL THAT THEY HAVE HAD MUCH SAY IN OUR IMMIGRATION POLICY AND THAT IS WHY THE SUPREME COURT DECISION TO UPHOLD THE INJUNCTION ON PRESIDENT OBAMA'S EXECUTIVE AMNESTY WAS MET WITH A SIGH OF E11 BY MOST PEOPLE AND BECAUSE OF THE NUMBERS.

THE LAST TWO YEARS, ACCORDING TO THE CENSUS BUREAU WE HAVE RECEIVED THREE MILLION NEW IMMIGRANTS TO OUR COUNTRY.

AND THIS IS HAVING REAL EFFECTS ON PEOPLE.

BECAUSE IT'S -- OUR ECONOMY IS NOT CREATING ENOUGH JOBS TO -- FOR EVEN AMERICANS AND THE LEGAL IMMIGRANTS WHO ARE HERE MUCH LESS ALL OF THE NEW ARRIVALS AND IT'S KEEPING WAGES DOWN.

AND IT'S MAKING IT'S AFFECTING THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN MANY COMMUNITIES.

AND DONALD TRUMP IS THE CANDIDATE WHO HAS MADE THIS A CENTERPIECE ISSUE FOR HIM AND PEOPLE ARE RESPONDING TO THAT.

MUCH MORE THAN ANY SPECIFIC COMMENTS HE HAS MADE BUT WITH THE IDEA THAT HE IS GOING TO REVERSE DIRECTION ON IMMIGRATION POLICY AND PUT THE NATIONAL INTEREST AHEAD OF THE SPECIAL INTERESTS WHO HAVE BEEN DRIVING IMMIGRATION POLICY FOR SO LONG.

>> IS IT POSSIBLE TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST IMMIGRATION FOR ANY NUMBER OF REASONS BECAUSE OF THE HUGE INCREASE IN POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES?

OR YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE CULTURAL CHANGES THAT PEOPLE MAY NOT BE COMFORTABLE WITH WITHOUT BEING CALLED A RACIST?

TRUMP HAS MADE RACIST REMARKS AND REPUBLICAN G.O.P.

MEMBERS CALLED HIM OUT ON THAT.

BUT CAN YOU WANT LESS OR NO IMMIGRATION WITHOUT BEING CALLED A RACIST?

>> NO IT'S HARD.

THAT IS AN ATTACK THAT IS ALWAYS MADE BY PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT MORE IMMIGRATION OR LESS CONTROL OVER IMMIGRATION.

BUT THE FACT IS IS THAT YOU -- SUPPORT FOR LOWER IMMIGRATION NUMBERS IS NOT INHERENTLY RACIST.

IT'S ABOUT CONCERN OVER THE AMERICANS AND LEGAL IMMIGRANTS WHO ARE DISPLACED FROM JOB OPPORTUNITIES.

IT'S CONCERN OVER THE POPULATION GROWTH THAT IS DRIVEN BY IMMIGRATION.

AND CONCERN OVER NATIONAL SECURITY AND OUR COUNTRY'S WELL-BEING.

SO IT IS -- AND THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MOST DISADVANTAGED BY MASS IMMIGRATION POLICIES ARE DISADVANTAGED MINORITIES.

AFRICAN-AMERICANS, RECENT IMMIGRANTS.

THEY ARE THE ONES WHO ARE COMPETING FOR THE SAME JOBS AND SERVICES.

>> IT'S MORE THAN IT'S ALSO ABOUT WHO COMES IN AND OUT OF THE COUNTRY IT'S ABOUT NATIONAL SECURITY.

AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT IS I THINK WE ALL HAVE DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS AND ONE THING WE AGREE.

>> YOU ARE AN IMMIGRANT FROM CUBA.

>> EXACTLY.

BUT ALL OF US WOULD AGREE THAT ONE OF OUR FUNDAMENTAL VALUES IS A SENSE OF FAIRNESS.

AND WHEN SOMEBODY CUTS IN LINE BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO WAIT AND TAKE SIX YEARS TO GET A VISA I HAVE FRIENDS WHO SPENT YEARS AND YEARS TO GET INTO THIS COUNTRY AND THEY SEE SOMEBODY CUT IN LINE ILLEGALLY AND THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DONALD TRUMP RESONATED WITH THE PEOPLE.

WAIT A MINUTE WE HAVE A SENSE OF FAIRNESS AND THAT IS ILLEGAL THAT IS NOT FAIR.

>> WELL, IT IS A COMPLICATED SITUATION.

I WOULD SAY THAT DEFINITELY IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE.

WE NEED TO AMEND THE LAWS.

AND LAWS WORK WHEN THEY ARE REFLECTIVE OF THE REALITIES OF THE WORLD AND THIS COUNTRY AS MUCH AS WE WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE THE BOUNDARIES AND BE JUST AMERICANS AND NOBODY COMES IN AND EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE PERFECT AND SAFE THAT IS NOT REALISTIC.

THE REALITY OF THE WORLD IS THAT PEOPLE ARE MOVING IN AND OUT.

AND THAT LAWS THAT ARE THE MOST EFFECTIVE IN PROTECTING THE NATIONAL SECURITY AND ALLOWING US TO HAVE A STABLE ECONOMY ARE LAWS THAT ARE REFLECTIVE OF THE DYNAMICS OF MIGRATION.

WHY ARE MANY PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF A CANDIDATE ACCUSED OTHER SIDE OF BEING RACIST?

BECAUSE THEY USE NUMBERS THAT ARE NOT REAL.

THEY USE NUMBERS THAT ARE QUESTIONABLE IN TERMS OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE IMMIGRANTS TO THE ECONOMY IN TERMS OF WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE CRIMINALS THEY ARE.

AND THEY PORTRAY IMMIGRANTS IN THE MOST NEGATIVE LIGHT WHEN THAT PROBLEM IS MUCH BIGGER THAN IMMIGRANTS.

IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES AND THOSE OF US THAT SUPPORT THE IMMIGRANT SCOOTS FEEL -- SUPPORT THE COMMUNITIES FEEL COMPELLED TO DEFEND THE RECORD.

AND THERE MIGHT BE A LOT OF THINGS ARE WRONG BUT IN PART WE -- IT'S HAPPENING BECAUSE THE IMMIGRATION LAWS ARE BROKEN.

THE IMMIGRATION LAWS ARE BROKEN AND NOT ALLOWING AN IMMIGRATION SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE LIKE YOUR FAMILY OR YOURSELF, THAT ALLOWS YOU TO COME HERE LEGALLY.

>> LET ME ASK YOU THIS.

AREN'T YOU IN ESSENCE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT WHAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE REFERRING TO AS IMMIGRATION REFORM BUT IS REALLY LEGALIZING MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO ENTERED THIS COUNTRY ILLEGALLY OR OVERSTAYED VISAS, MAINLY STUDENT VISA SO THEY ENTERED HERE AND WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT LOW-WAGE UNEDUCATED WORKERS FROM CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MIDDLE EASTERNERS AND EUROPEANS IN THAT CASE.

ISN'T REFORM WHICH WOULD LEGALIZE ALL THE PEOPLE ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING WE SHOULD LET ANYBODY IN WHO WANTS TO COME?

>> NO.

THE OPPOSITE.

>> LET ME FINISH.

I COVERED CONGRESS IN THE LATE 80s.

I WATCHED AS JIM WRIGHT THEN HOUSE SPEAKER WAS ON THE FLOOR FOR IMMIGRATION REFORM BACK THEN WAS GIVE LEGALIZATION TO EVERYBODY WHO IS HERE ILLEGALLY AND WE WON'T LET ANYMORE PEOPLE IN AFTER THAT.

I REMEMBER HIM SAYING, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO SCRUB YOUR TOILETS AND WASH YOUR FLOORS AND DON'T MAKE A LIVING WAGE AND BLAH, BLAH.

AND LOW AND BEHOLD IT PASSED 30 YEARS AGO.

>> 1986.

>> IT WAS 86 REFORM AND NOW WE HAVE THE SAME SITUATION AGAIN.

SO -- >> IT'S FAR WORSE, BONNIE.

BACK THEN WE WERE TALKING RONALD REAGAN SIGNED THE LEGISLATION AND ALL THE PROMISES WERE MADE WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS NOW.

MANY PEOPLE SAY YES THEY ARE HERE AND MANY CAME OR OVERSTAYED VISAS BUT THEY ARE HERE AND WE FEEL BAD.

THERE IS A FEELING THERE.

SO WE TRIED THAT ROUTE.

I THINK IT WAS 3 MILLION WHO WERE HERE AND FAST FORWARD TO TODAY AND NOW WE HAVE 12 MILLION.

SO IT'S DRAUD DRUPELLED THE PROBLEM.

QUADRUPLED WHY WOULD WE DO IT AGAIN?

>> BECAUSE PEOPLE FORGET HISTORY.

>> BECAUSE THE ENFORCEMENT ASPECT OF THAT GRAND BARGAIN THAT WAS MADE IN 1986 WAS NEVER ENACTED.

POLICYMAKERS BROKE THE PROMISE THEY MADE TO THE VOTERS THAT THEY WOULD FIX THE PROBLEM AND THAT IS WHY THE VOTERS ARE SKEPTICAL NOW.

>> AND ONE THING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAS DONE IS THAT HE PUT A LOT OF RESOURCES IN THE ENFORCEMENT AND CONTROLLING THE BORDERS AND THE RECORD OF IMMIGRANTS CROSSING THE BORDER ILLEGALLY IS REDUCED DRAMATICALLY.

SO I THINK -- >> IT'S GOING UP.

>> NO.

HE BUILT A RECORD THAT THAT CAN BE DONE TO BE ABLE TO SOLVE THE OTHER PROBLEM.

AND THE OTHER THING I WANT TO SAY IS WE ARE TALKING 11 MILLION.

EVERYBODY SAYING WELL THERE ARE GROUPS WITHIN THOSE 11 MILLION AND I DISAGREE.

YOU MAY HAVE WELCOMED THE FACT THAT THE SUPREME COURT WAS NOT ABLE TO OVERRULE THE INJUNCTION.

WE IN MY COMMUNITY ARE UPSET AND SADDENED THAT FAMILIES WILL BE BROKEN.

THERE ARE DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS IN THIS TABLE.

AND THEY ARE YOUNG PEOPLE THAT WERE BORN HERE AND BROUGHT HERE THEY DID NOT KNOW THEY WERE ILLEGAL.

THEY LEARNED THEY WERE ILLEGAL WHEN THEY WERE TEN OR 11.

PARENTS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY THE DEFER.

FOR PARENTS TO BE ABLE TO STAY WITH THEIR CHILDREN.

>> HERE IS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT.

MANY PEOPLE WOULD AGREE THAT YOU DON'T DEAL WITH EVERYBODY THE SAME BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY CAME THE SAME WAY BUT THE PRESIDENT WAS PUSHING AND WAS GOING TO DO IT AND WASN'T LETTING THE PEOPLE HAVE ANY SAY AND THE REAP WE ARE HAVING WHY WE ARE WHERE WE ARE TODAY NOTHING BECOMES A PROBLEM UNTIL IT IS A PROBLEM.

AND PEOPLE ARE FEELING IT IN WAGES AND TERRORISM THEY DON'T KNOW WHO IS COMING IN AND OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND SEE THINGS LIKE ORLANDO AND ARE SCARED AND WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS.

AND WHAT WE SAW HAPPEN IN THE UK WITH THEM VOTING TO GET OUT, A PART OF THAT WAS IMMIGRATION.

THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY HAD NO CONTROL OVER WHO COULD COME OR NOT COME.

ALL 28 COUNTRIES COME BACK AND FORTH AND THEY DID NOT MAKE THE DECISIONS ABOUT THAT.

PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED.

SO YOU MAY SAY IT IS AN OVERREACTION BUT I THINK PRESIDENT OBAMA CAUSED THAT IN THIS COUNTRY BY HIS OVERREACTION IN GOING AROUND CONGRESS.

>> SIMILAR TO REGULATORY MEASURES TAKEN BY PREVIOUS -- >> MUCH LARGER IMPACT.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FIVE MILLION PEOPLE THAT WERE GOING TO GET WORK PERMITS.

IT WAS AN ABUSE OF AUTHORITY CLEARLY AND ONE THAT WAS NOT -- >> OR SEEMED SO BY YOUR SIDE.

RIGHT?

>> OK. AND THE SUPREME COURT.

AND THE FIFTH CIRCUIT AS WELL.

EVEN THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF SAID 22 TIMES THAT HE WAS NOT A KING AND CANNOT DO THIS.

HE WENT AHEAD AND DID IT ANYWAY.

IT'S NOW BEEN SLAPPED DOWN WITH GOOD REASON.

AND ALSO THE COURT IS ENDORSING THE IDEA THAT THERE CAN BE NEGATIVE EFFECTS TO AMNESTY POLICIES.

>> HE IS NOT ENDORSING ANYTHING.

>> THE FIFTH CIRCUIT ENDORSED THAT YOU ARE KIDDING YOURSELF.

>> I SEE YOU IN THE MIDDLE ON THIS.

LET'S HOW DO YOU SOLVE IT?

I WOULD LIKE EACH SIDE HAS DIFFERENT IDEAS HOW TO RESOLVE IT BUT FOR SOMEONE IN THE MIDDLE HOW DO YOU SEE IT?

>> ACTUALLY THE WAY I SEE IT WE HAVE HAVE NOT ENFORCED THE LAWS THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE AND THAT IS A BIG PROBLEM AND I SPEND MY LIFE ENFORCING DISCRIMINATION LAWS AND MAKE ANOTHER LAW.

I THINK WE HAVE TO FIRST OF ALL PROCESS THE LAWS WE HAVE IN PLACE.

BUT I ALSO THINK THAT WE DO NEED THE REFORM.

I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW THE WAY THAT THE QUOTAS NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMING IN I THINK THAT IS OUTDATED.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE SKILL SETS THAT PEOPLE ARE BRINGING IN HERE.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT KNOWLEDGE-BASED WORKERS AND TECHNICAL WORKERS AS OPPOSED TO WELL LET'S GET THIS MANY PEOPLE.

>> QUICKLY, I CUT YOU OFF?

>> THAT IS OK. WE DO NEED TO REFORM OUR LEGAL IMMIGRATION SYSTEM AS WELL AND RESTORE IMMIGRATION LEVELS TO MORE TRADITIONAL LEVELS THAT ARE THE GOOD FOR OUR COUNTRY NOT FOR SPECIAL INTERESTS.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THAT IS IT FOR THIS EDITION.

FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER AND VISIT OUR WEBSITE PBS.ORG/TOTHECONTRARY.

AND WHETHER YOU AGREE OR THINK TO THE CONTRARY SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

[♪♪♪] FOR A TRANSCRIPT OR TO SEE AN ON-LINE VERSION OF THIS EPISODE OF TO THE CONTRARY VISIT OUR PBS WEBSITE AT PBS.ORG/TOTHECONTRARY.

[♪♪♪]