Pennsylvania’s Senator Bob Casey has been facing criticism from Republicans regarding his stance on border security and immigration reform. The Democratic Senator has been accused of changing his positions on these issues depending on whether he was running for re-election or not. Casey’s office has disputed these accusations, stating that the Senator has consistently supported efforts to strengthen border security and combat illegal immigration.
The latest criticism against Casey came after he slammed Republicans for not supporting a controversial Senate immigration bill earlier this month. This prompted responses from Republicans, who accused the Senator of flip-flopping on the issue and pushing for immigration fixes during election years but voting against them in off years. Phillip Letsou, a spokesperson for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, called Casey’s actions “lying to Pennsylvanians for power.”
In response to these accusations, the Casey campaign pointed to the Senator’s efforts to fortify security along the southwestern border. They also highlighted his support for drug detection measures at the border and his introduction of legislation aimed at strengthening border security. However, Casey’s past voting record tells a different story.
It was found that in 2021 and 2022, when Casey was not running for re-election, he voted against drug detection at the border. This contrasts with his current stance on the issue. Similarly, Casey has a history of voting against border security measures in years when he was not up for re-election, but supporting them in election years.
Casey’s critics have also pointed out his changing position on amnesty for illegal immigrants. When he was running for Senate in 2006, Casey campaigned against amnesty and even released an ad stating his opposition to it. However, in 2007 and 2013, when he was not running for re-election, Casey voted for legislation that included a pathway to citizenship, which his critics called a de facto amnesty.
The Senator’s stance on building a border fence has also been called into question. In 2006, Casey expressed support for a fence at strategic points along the southern border, saying it was necessary to secure the border. However, when he was not running for re-election in 2008, Casey opposed an amendment that would have added a border fence and deployed National Guardsmen to the border.
Casey’s position on holding employers accountable for hiring illegal immigrants has also been scrutinized. While running for Senate in 2006, Casey supported penalties for companies that hired illegal immigrants. However, in 2009, when he was not up for re-election, he voted against an amendment that would have strengthened e-verify screening.
Another issue at the forefront of the debate is federal benefits for illegal immigrants. In 2006, Casey opposed the idea of providing federal benefits to undocumented immigrants. However, in the years that followed when he was not running for re-election, Casey voted multiple times to allow federal benefits to go to illegal immigrants.
Casey’s Republican challenger, David McCormick, has been vocal in criticizing the Senator’s record on border security and immigration policies. He has accused Casey of being “complicit in this crisis” and not taking decisive action to secure the border.
In response to these accusations, Casey’s campaign has highlighted his efforts to work across the aisle and pass bipartisan legislation aimed at combating fentanyl smuggling across the border. They also pointed to the INTERDICT Act and STOP Act, which Casey supported and provided funding for drug screening and tracking fentanyl shipments.
The debate surrounding Casey’s stance on border security and immigration reform highlights the contentious nature of these issues. While both sides may have valid points to make, it is ultimately up to the voters to decide which candidate they believe will best represent their interests in the Senate. With the November elections approaching, it remains to be seen how these accusations will impact the outcome of the race for Pennsylvania’s Senate seat.
