Deport them.
Make them citizens.
Fine them.
Force them to learn English.
Build a fence to keep more of them out.
Those ideas are part of the campaign rhetoric heard in Nevada's congressional races as candidates wrestle with the difficult question of what to do about the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now living in the United States - and how to keep that number from growing.
Although polls have shown that most Americans see securing the nation's borders as the most important component in any comprehensive immigration policy, the issue is nuanced in states such as Nevada with sizable immigrant populations.
Perhaps no local congressional candidate faces a tougher task in paying heed to the competing constituencies - conservatives who favor hard-line measures, immigrants looking for a compassionate policy and others whose position blends elements drawn from both extremes - than Republican Rep. Jon Porter.
Along with Nevada's other Republican congressman, Jim Gibbons, Porter voted last year for a tough House bill to tighten the borders and to make felons of anyone living in this country illegally or any U.S. citizen who helps an illegal immigrant reside here.
After that plan was approved by a largely party-line vote, House Republican leaders trumpeted the bill's strong language, which resonated with conservatives across the country.
But it also drew an extraordinarily strong response from Mexican-Americans and illegal immigrants across the country. This spring, there were massive protests in many cities, including Las Vegas, where in May an estimated 40,000-plus marched down the Strip, the largest demonstration ever held here.
Protestors, calling the House bill draconian, vowed to work against anyone who voted for it. They favored the Senate's immigration reform bill, which did not criminalize residing in the United States illegally and offered an earned path to citizenship, including fines and payment of back taxes, for those already here illegally.
The scope of the local protest was sobering proof for Porter of how strongly the issue had touched a nerve.
Asked afterward about his support for the House bill, Porter said that the House leadership had told him before the vote that the plan was for the House to pass tough legislation that would later be softened in a compromise with the Senate.
In other words, House Republicans didn't really mean it.
Or did they? In the months after Porter's explanation, House leaders have continued to stand behind their bill. They aren't saying what Porter said - that they never intended for their measure to become law. And only last week, House Republicans pushed through legislation to build a 700-mile fence along the border.
Their stance and his explanation of his vote creates a political bind for Porter, whose district is nearly evenly split between Republicans and Democrats and is home to many Mexican immigrants.
Indeed, Porter is left trying to explain that politics requires compromise - and thus, he voted for a bill that he never intended to become law.
Gibbons also could face questions over his support for both last year's and last week's House bills - even though he would have less contact with the primarily federal issue if he succeeds in November in his bid to move from Congress to the governor's office in Carson City.
Securing the border, Gibbons says, is "the first step - the one thing we must do first." And though he also supports the general concepts of a guest-worker program and a citizenship formula for people now in the country illegally, Gibbons says he did not favor how those ideas came out in the Senate version.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, the state's lone Democrat in the House, voted against last year's bill but supported the fence proposal passed last week.
"There's no sovereign nation on the planet that could survive if they didn't have control of their border," she said.
The proposed fence - it is unclear whether the Senate will take up the House measure in the two weeks before Congress breaks for members to campaign for re-election - could divide voters in this fall's elections. It already has divided the candidates.
Whatever its potential practical impact in stemming the flow of illegal immigration, the planned fence is perhaps even more potent as a political symbol. To supporters who would like to see the fence eventually stretch across the entire Southwest border, the barrier is a necessary means of curtailing the countless thousands of illegal crossings that now occur. Critics, however, question its feasibility and warn that the fence could be perceived as a "reverse Berlin Wall" damaging to America's international image.
"For me, a 2,000-mile-long fence doesn't work," said 2nd Congressional District Democratic nominee Jill Derby.
The congressional candidates also stake out differing positions on thorny issues such as whether individuals now in the country illegally should receive amnesty, health benefits and a path to citizenship - or be deported.
One of the more unusual ideas on the subject comes from Kenneth Wegner, the Republican challenger to Berkley in the 1st Congressional District. If Wegner gets his way, U.S. troops now stationed in Europe and the Far East would be redeployed to the Mexican border.
Underlying the debate is an attempt by leading Republicans to shift the conversation in the run-up to November's midterm elections, focusing on border control instead of a broader approach to the immigration issue such as President Bush has advocated.
Democrats have accused the GOP of political grandstanding by bringing the volatile issue before Congress only a few weeks before Election Day. In doing so, Democrats charge, GOP leaders hope to drive conservative voters to the polls.
In Nevada, a state that saw its immigrant population grow by 250 percent between 1990 and 2000, the issue is as emotional as it is politically potent.
As the candidates grapple with the tough issue, some question whether the immigration debate will play as well here as it has elsewhere.
"I think the issue of immigration is more fad than fashion," said longtime Republican operative Pete Ernaut. "I just don't think the average Nevadan goes to bed with illegal immigration on (his) mind."
Candidates find out Nov. 7.
Here is a race-by-race look at how the immigration issue is playing out among the major candidates in Nevada's congressional campaigns.
U.S. Senate
Sen. John Ensign, who advocates a "border-first" approach, said he personally lobbied the Bush administration earlier this year to place National Guard troops on the border and has supported doubling the number of Border Patrol agents.
He voted against the Senate bill supported by Bush earlier this year, primarily because it included a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. He also opposed a provision in the bill that would allow undocumented workers to obtain Social Security benefits.
Ensign supports a comprehensive bill that would secure the border, develop a national employee verification system and establish a strict temporary-worker program.
Under the plan, illegal immigrants would be permitted to work in the country for three years and be eligible for a three-year extension. Guest workers also could earn additional time by learning English and securing a job with health care benefits, he said. Those who commit a crime or receive government assistance would be deported.
"We can deal with all the other stuff in the future," Ensign said.
Democratic nominee Jack Carter also would create a guest-worker program.
"You have to deal with the immigration issue as a whole," said Carter adviser Terry O'Connell, speaking on behalf of Carter, who has been recovering from severe colitis. "You can't solve it with a meat cleaver."
Border security, he said, is the first step of a multifaceted plan. Illegal immigrants would face penalties - which could include fines and back taxes - before advancing on a path to citizenship.
Carter's plan, he argues, not only would break the cycle of illegality at the Mexican border, but help industries - notably, the construction and service sectors in Southern Nevada - that rely on immigrant labor. "It's not just a crime and punishment issue," O'Connell said. "We've got to do this without wrecking our economy."
1st Congressional District
In voting against last year's House bill, Democrat Berkley faulted Republicans, charging that their support for the legislation showed a lack of leadership on the immigration issue.
"If they were uncomfortable with this legislation, and the fact that it was only punitive, they should have objected to their Republican leadership and it wouldn't have gotten on the floor for a vote," she said.
Berkley supports a temporary-worker program and a path to citizenship for those working here illegally.
"There should be a mechanism for earned citizenship," she said.
"I'm not talking about amnesty. I'm talking about a practical, common-sense approach. You can't jail, shoot or deport every man, woman and child here illegally. That's the reality. We have to confront the problem in a dispassionate way that works for this country."
Her opponent, Wegner, a businessman running a long-shot, get-tough-on-immigration campaign, has proposed a platform that includes a call for the redeployment of American troops from Germany and Japan to the Mexican border.
Opposed to a guest-worker program, Wegner instead would like to see illegal immigrants register at various checkpoints along the border as part of an "Ellis Island West" program intended to streamline the immigration process, expedite citizenship for those willing to work and learn English, and reduce the illegal drug trade.
"We need to fix the system," he said. "It takes entirely too long."
In addition, illegal immigrants serving jail time would be deported and businesses that hire undocumented workers would be held accountable.
2nd Congressional District
Nevada Secretary of State and GOP nominee Dean Heller said that he would have voted for last year's House bill, calling it a "place to start negotiating." The plan advocated by Bush and the Senate, he said, was a "road to amnesty."
Border security, he said, is the top priority on the issue. Heller also would crack down on companies that hire illegal immigrants.
Heller said he would favor a guest-worker program, if and when the border is secured, but opposes a path to citizenship for people here illegally.
Derby, meanwhile, sees immigration as an issue of homeland security, and says last year's House bill did not address the broader problem of America's 11 million-plus illegal immigrants. "Five years after 9/11, Washington and the Congress have really failed us," Derby said. "This is about national security."
Building a fence along the border, Derby said, would not be "a good use of resources." Instead, the government should allocate more resources for Border Patrol agents and new technology to secure the border, she said.
Like most other candidates, Derby stresses that she is opposed to amnesty.
"I do believe we have to find a way to identify and document the more than 11 million illegal immigrants living in this country," she said. "It's not appropriate to reward illegal behavior."
Derby's plan would require illegal immigrants to pay a fine, learn English and move to the back of the immigration line. She also supports a guest-worker program.
3rd Congressional District
Porter, who insists he voted for last year's House bill with the understanding that the enforcement-only legislation would be part of a compromise with the Senate, said he nonetheless believes that "we need a hard line on securing the border."
He said he would support some provisions in the Senate bill - namely a guest-worker program - "at some point," but points to securing the border as his most important priority.
Asked about a path to citizenship, Porter said: "I do not support amnesty." But he agrees that a process to document and register illegal workers is needed.
Democrat Tessa Hafen called the House bill incomplete. "You can't just work on half the problem," she said. "It's not just about the future. You have to look at the people that are here now."
While Hafen supports a path to citizenship for those here illegally, she's quick to point out that that would not equate to a free pass. Her plan, similar to the Senate bill, would fine illegal immigrants $2,000 and require them to learn English.
In addition to a plan that would authorize more border agents and using new technology, Hafen supports fining employers who hire undocumented workers. "If we stop the job opportunities, we stop illegal immigration," she said.
Governor
Although immigration is essentially a federal issue, it plays a role in the governor's race because Gibbons is campaigning against the Democratic nominee, state Sen. Dina Titus, based on his record in Congress.
Any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, Gibbons says, should require individuals to learn English, work and pay taxes - and not allow them to jump to the front of the immigration line.
"If there is a path to citizenship it must be the same path that every other legal applicant has done to be a legal citizen," Gibbons said. "That's the path to citizenship I support. That's clearly not what's in the Senate bill."
Although Titus has not had to confront the immigration issue in the state Senate - and would have limited contact, at most, with it as governor - she notes that the matter holds substantial import for Nevada.
About 20 percent of the employees in the gaming, restaurant and construction industries in Nevada, she says, are illegal immigrants. Their elimination from the local workforce, she adds, would be a serious blow to the local economy.
Once illegal immigrants are enrolled in a guest-worker program or launched on a path to citizenship, Titus believes they should be eligible for driver's licenses.
Join the Discussion:
Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.
Full comments policy