Dan Caplis Show, Cory Gardner, September 5, 2017

Station:    KNUS, 710 am

Show:       Dan Caplis Show

Guests:    Gardner, C.

Link:       http://dancaplis.podbean.com/

Date:        September 5, 2017


Click Here for Audio

HOST DAN CAPLIS:  a great privilege that the VIP line welcome Sen. Cory Gardner 710 Cane US to be a privilege simply because he’s one of Colorado’s two senators that he has taken a leadership role in the Senate that is way beyond what you normally see from a freshman center. One of those areas is been North Korea where the Senators been looking around corners now 4 Years Way ahead of the pack when it comes to this threat what to do about it. And then I obviously want to talk about DACA, illegal immigration, given the fact that the senator is from Colorado so deeply affected Sen. welcome back to 710 Cane US and

U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO, CORY GARDNER:  congratulations on this new timeslot appreciate you being part of the first show, it’s that you can feels like home because afternoon drives been where I’ve been. Most of the years and Craig and I had eaten half years together. An afternoon drive and I know you were a very active part of that as well so is good to have you here. What a crappy apartment thanks to get

CAPLIS:  Well, thanks. Hey, let’s start with DACA. And tell me if my premise is way off. My premise is, as I look at this is, while this could be so good for America in this way, and that is there will have to be the kind of trade-offs that I think the founding fathers envisioned, and if progressives want DACA to live on in legislative form, they’ll have to be willing to make concessions. And so far, their attitude — I think toward you and the Senate toward the president – has been, you know, “No retreat! No surrender! We’re never going to give an inch! Resistance to the death!” So, are we now going to see some healthy give-and-take?

Well, I hope that we can have a healthy debate, healthy dialogue, and then ultimately passage of bipartisan legislation to address our immigration crisis in this country. And
you know, when you speak specifically about DACA, I actually think we have to have a solution for people — for children — who were brought here through no fault of their own at a very young age. I mean, my gosh, we don’t charge my four-year-old, five-year-old son from walking across the neighbor’s lawn with trespass. That’s got to be part of the solution, just as border security needs to be part of our solution, just as fixing the entry exit system in this country needs to be part of the solution. And I hope that over the next several weeks — months — we have time to fix this and address so many other issues that I hear about day-to-day across the four corners of Colorado.

CAPLIS:  Isn’t that the natural trade-off? In other words, legislative DACA in exchange for a true border security – whether it’s a physical wall here, some other technology there, whatever it takes to actually control that darn border.  Isn’t that a natural trade-off?

Well, I think — you know, I don’t even look this is a trade-off situation. What I look at it as [is] people who believe we should have an immigration fix believe that we need to address it for children who were brought here through no fault of their own. They believe we need to fix border security. Even the ‘Gang of Eight’ Senate bill — that was voted on in the Senate in 2013, I believe it was […] — had border security increases in it. So I hope that this is part of a natural dialogue when it comes to what should be a good immigration policy that this country can set.

CAPLIS:  Well, you’re right. I mean, if we are talking about a rational conversation between two reasonable, well-intentioned groups, you’re right. There shouldn’t have to be any trade-off. Everybody should see it roughly the same way. But my view is different. My view is that the Democrats have not wanted the border fixed. If they wanted it fixed, they would’ve fixed all of this when they had the House, the Senate, and the White House.

Well, and there is a good argument to be made that when they had a chance to do it, unfortunately, they did not do it. But I think that we’ve got to take this chance now to put in place, something that both sides agree to.

CAPLIS:  Mm-hmm.

And if some people want to look at that as a trade-off. I guess that’s the way they’re going to look at it. I guess I look at it as a common sense approach to our overall picture of immigration, from the needs of agriculture who’s been asking for migration reform. I just got off the phone with some producers in southeastern Colorado who had significant challenges finding people to harvest melons this year. And I talked to rural communities that can’t find doctors to practice in their communities. And I talked to, you know, children who are in my daughter’s class, that have parents who came here without documentation. But they were babies when they were brought here. We can fix this! We can do it together. And I think we can do it in a way that makes America proud.

CAPLIS:  And what would that look like, Senator? I know you think about these things in infinite detail. What would the fix look like, if you had the magic wand?

So, again, I think you have border security. That’s got to be a piece of it. And you know, if that’s a wall – where it makes sense — then that’s a wall. If it’s an electronic perimeter then that’s an electronic perimeter. If it’s surveillance or personnel, then that’s what you do. That makes sense. We fix the piece dealing with children, who should be able to stay here, brought here through no fault of their own, and make sure that that is taken care of. We fix the entry-exit system. Of the 11 to 12 million people without documentation, 42% are — came to the United States on a legal visa – a valid visa – but overstayed their visit. We didn’t have the capacity or the policies in place to address what happens after they overstay their visa. That needs to be fixed. Making sure that we have a system in place so that employers are able to find the labor pool that they need. They ought to be able to hire Americans. And if they can’t, we need to make sure that they have the ability to hire people once they’ve exhausted that effort. But they need to know who they’re hiring is legal, and a system that actually works with that documentation. So, I think we can have a system that builds on each one of those elements. And I hope that’s something that we can address over the next several months.

CAPLIS:  Senator Cory Gardner, our special guest, what would the DACA side look like to you – a legislative DACA? Would it be any different than in the president’s DACA Executive Order?

Well, I think it is important to point out that I think President Obama –. We’re in this position today because of President Obama. He issued an Executive Order instead of going through Congress, where it should have been — this debate should have been held. And as a result, I think you had the White House put in a position where the courts were going to strike down — or could strike down, very likely strike down this Executive Order.

CAPLIS:  Mm-hmm.

And then what? The rightful place for this debate is in Congress. And so, that’s what we ought to do. And that’s why it’s important to have this debate — what DACA looks like. You know, you set the age for people –be that the DREAM Act, which I support, the ability to move forward on something like that — that could be a fix. There’s others out there, like Congressman Coffman’s idea, Carlos Curbelo’s from Florida. There are bipartisan ideas out there that make a lot of sense — and I think the vast majority of the American people support — but let’s start with the premise that this is a rule of law issue, and Congress is the right body to have this discussion.

CAPLIS:  Oh, no question about that! And I think that’s probably 80-20 agreement in America. But then you get down to some of the real tough points, such as would you envision a legislative DACA granting citizenship?

Well, I think if you had it under the time frames as envisioned, I think for those who are young and brought here as children, yes.  You can do that. And I think that that’s one of the areas where I think there is bipartisan support.

CAPLIS:  Hmmm. And I think you’re right about that.   this point to North Korea. If you have a couple more minutes and know your time is short, but you been way ahead of the curve on North Korea. Obviously in about just happen unless you disagree with the premise was momentous where you see things with North Korea right now are we closer to military action and what’s left in that the toolkit before military action which would carry such heinous consequences would be necessary in the past 24 hours that had detailed and in-depth conversations with Sec. Tillis and Harry Harris are commander of pay, Pacific command just got off the phone earlier today with — or Haley – and just now minutes to go with that Gen. Robinson who is the head of Morcom there with extending the homeland from a missile strike the North Korea or whoever it is becoming very clear that the actions that came Senate are taking a more more provocative. I’ve stated before that I believe is missile launch over Japan and this is prior to misread nuclear recent nuclear detonation that was designed to drive conflict and that Nikki Haley said that Kim is on the moon appears to be begging for more. We still have diplomatic runway left and we need to use that we need to increase our sanctions. We need to increase the penalties on China for doing business with North Korea and I think we need to make sure that we are naming and shaming businesses around the globe, wherever they are. Do business with North Korea. Worshipful economic blockade of North Korea we should shut off the petroleum reserves we have got to make it clear that a nuclear program in North Korea is on acceptable and there is no hesitation about that and we can stand for nothing less than denuclearization. I believe we can go peacefully. Obviously there are plans in place to address what would happen should it come to conflict. Let’s hope and pray that doesn’t happen because there is room left on the diplomatic side and we have to exercise that to have that continued threat of Japan and Korea drive nuclear proliferation throughout the region. You got Kim Jong-Il who. My guess is that will yell on in the coming days attempt to test the ICBM full-blown ICBM missile and you know the conference room and I actually think that perhaps Kim Jong-Il is starting to take these these rash actions because he starting to feel the pressure that starting to get to him and is trying to lash out and the only way he knows how and perhaps this is actually the start of the way forward when it comes to denuclearization, so nothing was starting the lash out in order to push America to more quickly acknowledgment sure he reads and oppressive a lot of prominent Americans on the left saying that the US has to accept a nuclear on North Korea. There’s really no alternative, see you think he’s getting desperate needs, trying to push that ultimate conclusion happen much faster elected like Iran taken on. For example, that enough or long enough you get what you want and that’s what Kim Jong-Il is hoping to get to lack bad enough United States will make some kind of a deal that guarantees or enshrines a nuclear program. It will be wink wink nudge nudge peaceful and that’s what Ron got wheat we cannot fall for that again we have to make it clear that there is no way will be left with a nuclear key. And it’s it’s unacceptable and we won’t stand for and we have to engage the world community the global community and global embargoes and relationships and make sure that no nation around the globe accepts foreign labor for North Korea, which is basically violation of human rights used to prop up the Kim Jong-Il regime and we got to bring pressure to China and Russia to do more and more and more I think you’re right about the economic blockade but it has to be total and to get it you have to cut off trade with China or otherwise do something dramatic to convince China to go along. Because yes, that economic blockade is, is clearly the best chance to avoid war, but how you get China to go there and they go after and sanction those entities that individuals and businesses within China that are doing business with North Korea. I’ve introduced bipartisan legislation that names 10 businesses in China who are still doing business with North Korea and in fact these 10 businesses responsible for 30% of the North Korean economic activity that China has 90% of North Korea’s entire economy is contingent on China. 30% of which these 10 companies responsible for select sanction and let’s bar them from any dollar-denominated transaction using our financial system. Let’s let’s make sure that we freeze their assets here in the United States we deny anybody visa that comes in the United States is with one of these businesses let’s figure out ways to make it painful for anybody who makes the choice of doing business with North Korea instead of the United States and is 60 seconds with the questions left. If you can spare set time yesterday. The Pres. referred to possibly cutting off trade with China. Would you support that as a last resort resort, not to try to push China into doing what it should do what they should meditate to impose secondary sanctions on China or entity that does business with North Korea. But I think what we focus on right now those businesses who are doing business with that chat with North Korea. We know there’s over 5000 of these businesses. Let’s target them and I believe the government China will will get the point? Do you agree with Steve and at least as quoted in the off the record interview. I do agree with Steve Bannon that there really isn’t a military option in North Korea. Their ability to kill so many insoles so quickly really means came over for us militarily. We are bound by mutual defense treaty to have a military option with North Korea when it comes to our relationship with South Korea. That’s our obligations under a legal defense treaty so there is a military option that the goal has to be peaceful denuclearization and the goal has to be recognition that that a conflict with North Korea would cost the horrific live life and result in casualties that have to be avoided. Latency attended in any other message to the folks out here. I think that we got a great August had a set of books on economic growth cutting taxes. Make sure the work that where in and taking care of the folks you definitely need in Texas with the disaster they’ve been through and making sure that we get these policies on North Korea right so that a full schedule have think she tended to keep up the great work think she’s Sen. appreciate your three 696-1971 would love your thoughts, your reaction to the interview, any part of that. You may want to dive into. I do think and I understand there some and some of this radio station who don’t have my positive view of Sen. Gardner. I’ll take it further and I think it is extremely fortunate for Colorado that Cory Gardner is our senator, because by virtue of his skill set and the fact that he is taking the initiative to put himself in these leadership positions you think all those folks today Mattis on those other people to be talking to him talking to him in this step, if he is not had of the Republican Senatorial committee, etc. I think all of that is an advantage for Colorado in two ways. First of all, I think it provides you more access means more opportunity to push Colorado’s agenda but the other is that I think we want people like Cory Gardner having a greater influence on our national trajectory and does so again I think were lucky to have. I know not everybody agrees and we always entertain that conversation appreciate his time today 33696 1971 the number I pick what’s again thank Capt. Kirk now you know, after all these years with Casey Blair such a phenomenal producer coming out of Kirk Woodland producing the afternoon show who is a tremendous young talent. We spent election night together here in studio he produced for Craig and make