Some reporters frame Coffman vote as pro-immigrant, when it wasn’t
Rep. Mike Coffman got a lot of credit from Denver media earlier this month when he voted against blocking Obama’s executive order allowing millions of immigrants with family ties in American to temporarily avoid deportation.
The Associated Press, for example, reported Dec. 4 that “Mike Coffman, who has also tacked to the center on immigration, was one of only seven House Republicans to vote to uphold Obama’s order from last month.” And the Durango Herald offered similar reporting.
But Coffman made it clear in a statement after the vote that he thought Obama’s executive order was unconstitutional, and that he was only voting against the legislation because, if passed, the bill would deceive Americans into believing Congress had but a check on Obama’s “overreach.”
So he managed to cast a pro-immigrant vote, even though he maintained and reiterated his anti-immigrant position in opposition to Obama’s initiative.
Some news outlets handled Coffman’s duplicity better than the AP did. The Denver Post and Fox 31 Denver, for example, ran Coffman’s entire statement, at least giving readers the chance to scratch their heads and wonder about it.
The Post’s Nancy Lofholm reported Coffman’s vote against blocking Obama’s program, but informed readers:
[I]n a statement on his nay vote on the Yoho bill, Coffman made clear his vote had nothing to do with support for Obama’s executive orders.
“I voted against H.R. 5797 because, although I strongly believe it is unconstitutional to have immigration policy made through executive orders and without consent of Congress, this legislation will only mislead the American people into believing that we are taking care of the problem when the only way to address President Obama’s overreach is either through the U.S. Supreme Court or through the appropriations process,” Coffman’s statement read
I’m hoping more reporters take notice next time, if Coffman’s position on a bill runs counter to his actual vote on it.