TROOPS ON THE BORDER

April 06, 2018 at 4:30 am

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney is here to discuss President Trump’s plan to militarize the Mexican border, the census “citizenship” question, and gun legislation amongst other things. A must see interview!

Aired on April 5, 2018. 

Transcript Print

>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO
"METROFOCUS," I'M JACK FORD.
THERE ARE A LOT OF MOVING PARTS
FOR THE ACTION GOING DOWN ON
CAPITOL HILL WITH A WHITE HOUSE
SEEMINGLY IN TURMOIL, WITH BOTH
PARTIES AT ODDS ON MANY THINGS,
FROM GUN REGULATION, TAXES AND
THE CENSUS.
>>> FIRST OUR BREAKING STORY,
TONIGHT, PRESIDENT TRUMP
ORDERING TROOPS ALONG THE
MEXICAN BORDER TO HELP EASE THE
FLOW OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
APPREHENSIONS THERE ARE AT THEIR
LOWEST LEVEL IN 37 YEARS, WHILE
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION SPECIFICALLY
FROM MEXICO IS AT ITS LOWEST
LEVEL IN 50 YEARS.
JOINING US WITH A LOOK AT ALL OF
THAT, ALL THAT'S GOING ON, IT'S
OUR PLEASURE AS ALWAYS TO HAVE
CONGRESSWOMAN CAROLYN MALONEY.
ALWAYS NICE TO SEE YOU.
>> ALWAYS NICE TO SEE YOU AND TO
BE ON YOUR IMPORTANT SHOW.
>> LET'S START WITH THE NOTION
OF TROOPS NOW BEING SENT TO THE
MEXICO BORDER.
YOUR PERSPECTIVE, DO YOU THINK
IT'S NECESSARY AT THIS POINT?
>> NO, I DON'T AND I DON'T WANT
TO MILITARIZE OUR BORDER, NOR DO
I THINK DEMOCRATS WANT THE
MILITARY AT OUR BOARDER AND I
DON'T THINK THE MILITARY
THEMSELVES WANT TO BE THERE.
I THINK THAT THE PRESIDENT
YESTERDAY HAS CALLED FOR THE
NATIONAL GUARD, OF THE GOVERNORS
TO SEND THE NATIONAL GUARD TO
THE BORDER.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PRESIDENT
OBAMA, AND PRESIDENT -- I CAN'T
ON SAY HIS NAME.
THE AUTHOR OF TWO WARS AND $15
TRILLION AND AND A FINANCIAL
SURPLUS.
HE ALSO SENT THE NATIONAL GUARD
TO THE BORDER.
THERE WAS REPORTS THAT THERE WAS
SUPPOSED TO BE A HUGE INFLUX,
BUT WE HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET.
BUT THE NATIONAL GUARD IS AN
APPROPRIATE FALL BACK POSITION.
I DO NOT BELIEVE AMERICA WANTS
TO MILITARIZE AND ARM THE BORDER
WITH ONE OF OUR CLOSEST ALLIES.
>> TWO PREVIOUS PRESIDENTS HAVE
TAKEN SIMILAR STEPS.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA SENT
12,000 NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS,
PRESIDENT BUSH SENT ABOUT 6,000.
THEY WERE TOLD SPECIFICALLY THEY
WERE THERE NOT TO BE ARMED BUT
TO ASSIST IN VARIOUS FUNCTIONS.
SO THE ADMINISTRATION HAS SAID
WE ARE JUST DOING WHAT
PRESIDENTS BEFORE US HAVE DONE.
ISN'T THERE SOME VALIDITY TO
THAT ARGUMENT?
>> NATIONAL GUARD WAS VALIDITY,
BUT HIS FIRST REGARD WAS TO SEND
THE AMERICAN MILITARY, TO HAVE
TRAINED TROOPS THAT ARE THERE TO
DEFEND US, TO HAVE THE MILITARY
ITSELF THERE AND ARMED.
LIKE ALL OF HIS TWEETS, IT'S NOT
CLEAR AT ALL THAT THE POLITICS
HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT AND IN WHAT
FORM.
I DO NOT SUPPORT MILITARYIZING
OUR BORDER.
BUT WE HAVE USED THE NATIONAL
GUARD IN TIMES OF STRESS WHEN WE
DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH BORDER
PATROL.
>> IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THE IDEA
IS TO MIRROR ESSENTIALLY WHAT
PRESIDENT OBAMA AND PRESIDENT
BUSH DID, NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS,
NOT ENGAGED SPECIFICALLY IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT, BUT JUST AS A
PRESENCE, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH
THAT?
>> IT DEPENDS ON WHAT IS THE
THREAT.
THEY SAY THERE'S THIS LARGE
GROUP OF ASYLUM SEEKERS, ALMOST
1,500 MARCHING TOWARD THE
BORDER.
IF THAT IS HAPPENING, AND YOU
HAVE TO SEE THE SPECIFICS.
THEN IT MAY BE APPROPRIATE.
BUT LIKE ANYTHING, IT'S HARD TO
TALK ABOUT WHAT IFS.
I AM TOTALLY AGAINST HAVING THE
MILITARY AT THE BORDER, BUT THE
NATIONAL GUARD HISTORICALLY HAS
COME IN AND PROVIDED ASSISTANCE
TO BORDER PATROL WHEN THEY FEEL
THEY NEED IT.
SO I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED
AT AND THE SPECIFICS HAVE TO BE
PRESENTED TO CONGRESS.
IT'S A TWEET.
>> WE NEED THE DETAILS.
>> YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT IS
TRULY BEHIND IT.
IS THERE IN FACT -- THERE'S BEEN
SOME REPORTS THAT IT'S BEEN
DISBANDED, I DON'T KNOW, THIS SO
CALLED INFLUX OF ASYLUM SEEKERS.
WE DON'T KNOW AND WE'LL HAVE TO
SEE WHAT THE FACTS ARE.
WE'LL BE BACK IN WASHINGTON,
D.C. ON THURSDAY, AND I'LL GIVE
YOU THE DETAILS, BUT RIGHT NOW
IT'S NOTHING MORE THAN A TWEET.
>> GUNS, THERE'S BEEN A
SIGNIFICANT UPTICK IN
DISCUSSIONS, CONVERSATIONS,
PROPOSALS ABOUT GUN SAFETY.
YOU'RE INVOLVED NOW, YOU HAVE
SOME SUGGESTIONS THAT YOU WANT
TO PUSH FORWARD IN CONGRESS.
TELL US ABOUT THE ELEMENTS OF
YOUR PROPOSAL.
>> I HAVE ROUGHLY SEVEN
DIFFERENT BILLS BEFORE CONGRESS
AND I TRULY FEEL THAT
SOMETHING'S DIFFERENT NOW,
BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PUBLIC HAS
JUST HAD IT AND THE STUDENT
LEADERSHIP, NOT JUST IN FLORIDA,
I WOULD SAY ACROSS THE COUNTRY
IS HAVING SUCH A GREAT IMPACT.
>>
>> I SAW THE TERM YOUTH QUAKE.
>> IN THE OMNIBUS BILL THEY MADE
TWO CHANGES, ONE IS THEY REMOVED
THE PROHIBITION ON STUDYING GUN
SAFETY.
AND I HAVE HAD SENATOR MARKEY ON
THAT FOR YEARS, AND THE OTHER
WAS TO STRENGTHEN THE NATIONAL
INSTANT BACKGROUND CHECK, FBI
CENTRAL AREA WHERE WE CHECK FOR
BACKGROUND CHECKS.
THE BILL I'M INTRODUCING WHEN I
GO BACK ON TUESDAY AND REALLY
MEETING WITH GUN GROUPS TODAY,
IS THE NIX FIX BILL, THAT WOULD
ALLOW THE FBI TO HAVE THE
ABILITY ON BACKGROUND CHECKS.
IN 2004, THE REPUBLICANS CHANGED
THE SYSTEM THAT YOU ONLY HAD 24
HOURS TO AUDIT AND THEN IT HAD
TO BE DESTROYED.
PRIOR TO 2004, IT HAD TO BE 90
DAYS.
THEY FOUND THAT MANY PEOPLE
GAMED THE SYSTEM, USED FALSE
NAMES.
>> SO THIS WOULD KEEP THE
RECORDS AVAILABLE FOR 90 DAYS,
JUST TO MAKE SURE THERE'S
NOTHING THERE THAT GOT MISSED?
>> SO THE CRIMINALS WHO ARE
DANGEROUS TO SOCIETY, THEY CAN
GO BACK AND TAKE THOSE GUNS AWAY
FROM THEM?
>> IS THERE A SENSE THAT THERE'S
SOME BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THAT
ELEMENT?
>> I CERTAINLY HOPE SO, JACK.
THIS YOUTH EARTHQUAKE IS HAVING
SOME IMPACT.
THEY HAVE ALSO CALLED FOR EVERY
MEMBER OF CONGRESS TO HAVE A
TOWN HALL MEETING THIS WEEKEND,
I'M HAVING MINE AT VELAZQUEZ
MIDDLE SCHOOL IN BROOKLYN, YOU
CAN GO TO MY FACEBOOK CALENDAR
OR MY WEBSITE TO FIND OUT WHERE
IT IS.
SO EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS,
REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT SHOULD
BE HAVING THAT.
THIS STUDENT LEADERSHIP, I WAS
PART OF THE MARCH FOR OUR LIVES
AND MANY OTHERS AS SUPPORT FOR
THESE STUDENTS.
AND ALSO THE WALKOUT.
HOW DUMB CAN YOU BE?
TO NOT HAVE SENSIBLE GUN SAFETY
LAWS.
IF GUNS MADE YOU SAFER, WE WOULD
BE THE SAFEST COUNTRY IN THE
WORLD.
WE HAVE MORE GUNS THAN ANY OTHER
INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY BY FAR.
THE YOUNG PEOPLE ARE SAYING I
WANT TO BE SAFE TO GO TO SCHOOL.
>> IN THE NEWS RECENTLY THERE'S
BEEN SOME SUGGESTIONS BY THIS
PRESIDENT THAT THEY WANT TO HAVE
A QUESTION ABOUT CITIZENSHIP IN
THE UPCOMING SCENSUS.
EVERY 10 YEARS, WE'RE REQUIRED
BY THE CONSTITUTION TO CONDUCT A
CENSUS.
THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF
ATTORNEYS GENERAL WHO ARE IN THE
PROCESS OF FILING SUIT.
THEY WANT TO STOP THIS.
WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THAT IT'S
INAPPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE A
QUESTION ABOUT CITIZENSHIP ON
THE CENSUS?
>> IT'S IMPORTANT IN
REPRESENTATION AND THE
DISTRIBUTION OF OVER 700 BILLION
IN FEDERAL FUNDS AND THE
CITIZENSHIP QUESTION WAS THROWN
IN WITHOUT BEING STUDIED, MOST
OF THE QUESTIONS ARE STUDIED FOR
THREE YEARS.
I HAVE A BILL THAT SAYS YOU
DON'T PUT IN QUESTIONS AT THE
LAST MINUTE THAT HAVE NOT BEEN
STUDIED AND APPROVED BY THE
CENSUS BUREAU AND THE
PROFESSIONALS.
FIVE OF THE LAST CENSUS
DIRECTORS HAVE COME OUT IN BOTH
ADMINISTRATIONS AGAINST THIS
PROPOSAL.
THE IDEA IN THE CONSTITUTION IS
THAT YOU SHOULD COUNT EVERYONE.
AND PROFESSIONALS ARE SAYING
THAT THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION
WILL RESULT IN AN UNDERCOUNT IN
IMMIGRANT POPULATIONS AND URBAN
AREAS LIKE NEW YORK CITY AND
CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES
BECAUSE THEY WON'T ANSWER IT.
THEY'LL GO UNDER GROUND, THEY
WON'T ANSWER IT AND PEOPLE WHO
SYMPATHIZE WITH IMMIGRANTS,
IMMIGRANT FAMILIES WON'T ANSWER
IT SO IT WILL RESULT IN AN
UNDERCOUNT SO THAT YOUR FUNDING
FORMULAS WON'T BE ACCURATE AND
FEDERAL FUNDING FORMULAS ARE ALL
TIED TO CENSUS NUMBERS SO IT'S
CRITICAL.
ALSO YOUR REAPPORTIONMENT
NUMBERS ARE ALSO TIED TO THE
CENSUS.
IF YOU'RE NOT COUNTED, YOU'RE
NOT REPRESENTED AND YOU'RE NOT
COUNTED.
AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR RELIES ON
IT TREMENDOUSLY FOR RESEARCH,
WHERE IS THE COUNTRY GOING,
WHAT'S HAPPENING?
IT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT
SCIENTIFIC DOCUMENT THAT WE
PRODUCE IN OUR COUNTRY AND IT
SHOULD BE ACCURATE.
WHY DO A CENSUS IF YOU'RE GOING
TO PUT A QUESTION ON THAT EVERY
PROFESSIONAL INCLUDING FIVE
CENSUS DIRECTORS HAVE SAID, BOTH
REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT, HAVE
SAID DON'T DO IT, IT'S WRONG,
IT'S GOING TO PRODUCE AN UNDER
COUNT.
>> SOME ATTORNEYS GENERAL
INVOLVED IN LITIGATION, AND
HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET YOU BACK
HERE AND TALK ABOUT THIS MORE.
>> GOOD TO SEE YOU.
>> TAKE CARE.