Aurora’s 6th Congressional District candidates spar over immigration reform in Spanish and English during first debate

AURORA | Amid much of the same party-line divisions over the Affordable Care Act and gun control, immigration was a standout issue for Republican Congressman Mike Coffman and Democratic challenger state Sen. Morgan Carroll during Univision Colorado’s televised Spanish-language debate, the first debate between candidates for Aurora’s 6th Congressional District.

Carroll accused Coffman of being disingenuous when it comes to his evolving views of immigration reform. Carroll said Coffman talks about more complex, compassionate ways to handle millions of illegal residents, but he doesn’t support a comprehensive reform package or the DREAM Act, a federal bill that would allow people brought into the country illegally as children to become citizens. In the past Coffman has also introduced legislation to overturn requirements that diverse areas provide bilingual ballots to voters and had spoken positively of immigration hardliner Rep. Tom Tancredo, Coffman’s predecessor to the district.

During the debate, Coffman turned that argument back on Carroll, pointing out that she, too, was once opposed to a statewide DREAMer-like  measure, and that she was a deciding vote against that bill in 2009. During the debate, Carroll did not directly address the accusation and instead pointed to her embrace of the concept and how she worked to pass a version of the bill four years later.

In recent years, Coffman has softened his stance on immigration, stating that he does not support “mass deportation,”  a term used by Republican presidential challenger Donald Trump. Coffman more recently said he supports limited and specific paths to citizenship, such as his Military Enlistment Opportunity Act, a proposal that would allow undocumented minors a path to citizenship through the military. In the past, he was demonstrably against a comprehensive package of reform laws suggested by the so-called Gang of Eight. That bi-partisan measure created a path for citizenship by paying back taxes and other requirements, as long as they weren’t convicted criminals.

“I would support a legal status but not a special path to citizenship for the adults who knowingly violated our immigration laws,” Coffman told the Aurora Sentinel in September. It’s unclear what would happen for undocumented immigrants under Coffman’s preferences who don’t have criminal records, but who also don’t fall into groups being afforded ways to resolve residency issues.

“Earlier this year, I also co-sponsored the Recognizing American Children Act, which if enacted, will provide legal status and a path to Lawful Permanent Resident status for those currently eligible under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program,” Coffman said. “This program is for individuals who were brought here as children, grew up here, went to school here and don’t know of any other country as home. If they can demonstrate their commitment to keeping a job or getting an education, or they enlist in the military, they can become lawful permanent residents and from there they can apply for citizenship.”

During the debate, Coffman said that in 2009 Carroll voted against Senate Bill 170, which would have granted in-state tuition to the children of illegal immigrants.

“I can say that I supported in the past the Dream Act for Colorado in 2013, I was Majority Leader when we got that through. We have acted at the state level, now it’s time for Congress to do its part and pass the Dream Act federally,” Carroll said.

Carroll did not respond during the debate to why she voted against that 2009 bill, instead pointing to her 2013 record and beyond.

She later told the Aurora Sentinel she regretted the 2009 vote against the bill, and that it was a mistake.

In 2009, she posted on her website, “I cannot support SB 170 in a climate where the state is cutting or eliminating over $1 billion of benefits to the people and is facing a $300 million cut to higher education, which virtually ends higher education as we know it in the State of Colorado.”

At the time, fellow Democratic state legislators, including Jessie Ulibarri, said they were appalled by her vote.

Televised in Spanish, Carroll spoke through a translator while Coffman primarily read from note cards in Spanish. This is the second time Coffman attended a debate primarily conducted in Spanish. His staff said he has learned Spanish because so many of his constituents in Aurora and the metro area are Spanish speakers. The Carroll campaign chided Coffman for essentially repeating closing comments in Spanish he used two years ago when debating former state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff. Romanoff ran an unsuccessful bid for Coffman’s congressional seat, an election that Coffman won handily.

Coffman and Carroll debate again Oct. 12  for the Channel 12/KCNC-Channel 4 in the Colorado Public Television studio, with that debate to air Oct. 14.