I’ve read Walker is squishy on amnesty. Do you have more insight into that?
“As vague as Scott Walker has been in his past statements on immigration, he has repeatedly claimed that he opposes amnesty for undocumented immigrants. That may not always have been the case.
A 2002 resolution passed by the Milwaukee County government and signed by thencounty executive Scott Walker expressed support for comprehensive immigration reform. As he has begun to lay the groundwork for a presidential bid, Walker has been deliberately ambiguous about his views on immigration, but the 2002 resolution, passed just weeks after Walker was elected county executive, called for allowing undocumented working immigrants to obtain legal residency in the United States.
In public appearances in recent months, the Wisconsin governor has steered clear of that position. He has walked a different tightrope, saying that he opposes amnesty but hinting that he supports some version of a pathway to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally, provided that they pay penalties, complete a waiting period, and satisfy additional requirements.
Governor Walker does not support amnesty, the governors spokesman, Tom Evenson, tells National Review Online. Evenson says the 2002 resolution was stripped of references to amnesty before passage the reference to amnesty comes in an introductory paragraph and the resolution was, in fact, a substitute resolution for an original that was more strongly pro-amnesty and reinforces the governors view that illegal immigrants should face penalties before they are granted citizenship. The resolution, viewable here, did not mention or spell out such penalties, and expressed support for comprehensive immigration reform that would have provided greater opportunity for undocumented working immigrants to obtain legal residency in the United States....
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/413766/walkers-about-face-amnesty-andrew-johnson
I think his views on the subject have changed over time. He seems to have supported some version of amnesty in the early 2000’s. Today he appears to oppose it in most cases. He hasn’t been entirely clear and that’s an issue that presumably he’ll have to address during the primary process.
I would caution conservatives not to discard any candidate over an inconsistent view on one issue. None of these men is perfect, not even Ted Cruz. If we nitpick at all of them, then we end up with 2012 where every conservative candidate was damned as a conservative heretic over one or two issues and we ended up with Mitt Romney as a result.