Posted on 11/13/2012 7:46:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Of all the misguided, corrupt and deranged ideas floating around inside the D.C. bubble, perhaps the single worst one is giving illegal aliens amnesty as part of some sort of attempt to capture the Hispanic vote. If the GOP were to pursue a policy that primarily benefits corrupt business owners, the government of Mexico, and Democrats at the expense of our country and our own base, we'd truly deserve the "Stupid Party" moniker that has so often been hung around our neck. This policy wouldn't be a calculated risk or even a longshot; it would be a game of Russian Roulette with a bullet in every chamber.
1) We'd be bringing in a huge influx of Democratic voters. Roughly 70% of Hispanic Americans already vote for the Democrats and you have to expect that the Democrats would capture an even larger percentage of illegal aliens. Keep in mind that for the most part, illegals are poorly educated, have minimal English skills, come from socialistic countries and make a living here doing low end, poorly paid manual labor. The GOP would be lucky to capture 20% of that block of voters.
Now, let's do a little rough math. We don't know exactly how many illegal aliens are in the country, but 10 million seems like a nice conservative estimate. If the Democrats did actually capture 80% of those voters, it would lead to a net gain of 6 million potential new votes for the Democrats. Meanwhile, if only 407,000 votes had flipped from Obama to Romney in Florida (73,858), Ohio (103,481), Virginia (115,910) and Colorado (113,099), Mitt would have won and Chris Matthews would still be on a depression-related leave of absence. In other words, this is like coming up just short in a 100 yard dash and deciding to “fix” the problem by starting 25 yards farther back in the next race.
2) There would be a tremendous backlash from Republican voters. The GOP pushed for amnesty in George W. Bush's second term and it was hit with a political buzzsaw the size of the Hoover Dam. What makes anyone think it would be any different this time?
Personally, I'm willing to pledge my support to ANY viable primary challenger who takes on a Republican in Congress who votes for an amnesty bill. Put another way, even if it were Jim DeMint, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul or Paul Ryan, if you're for amnesty and have someone who can conceivably beat you in a primary, I'm for your opponent. There's no other choice because this policy is like playing a game of chicken with an oncoming train; so stopping amnesty is priority one and if it can't be done, then we should at least send as many of the politicians responsible to the political graveyard as possible.
3) It would be terrible policy for the country. At a time when the unemployment rate is sky high and the country is running a trillion dollar deficit, how much sense does it make to bring in 10 million new citizens who'll be a huge net drain on the country? We're not talking about bringing in ten million engineers, scientists, computer programmers and entrepreneurs to expand the tax base. To the contrary, we're talking about offering the gift of American citizenship to 10 million, largely uneducated manual laborers with minimal English skills, most of whom would draw tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars more in government benefits than they pay out over the course of their lifetimes. You MIGHT be able to make a case that we need a guest worker program to handle some of these low skill jobs, although even that would be difficult when so many Americans are out of work, but it's impossible to make any sort of coherent argument that 10 million brand spanking new poor Americans are going to do anything other than hurt the country at a time when we're already running a trillion dollar plus deficit every year.
4) Amnesty distracts us from the voter outreach we really need to be doing. As a party, the GOP does almost no Hispanic outreach. Just to give you an idea of how bad it is, in 2009 I found out that the Democrats had 20 senators scheduled to attend the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce’s 19th Annual Legislative Conference while the Republicans had none. After raising holy hell about that on Right Wing News, senators like Orrin Hatch and Lamar Alexander suddenly agreed to be on the roster. Conservatives shouldn't need to publicly shame the Republican Party into showing up at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.
Additionally, while I don't think the Republican National Committee could have possibly made a better selection for its first national Director of Hispanic Outreach than my friend Bettina Inclan, why did we have to wait until the last election cycle for it to happen? It's not as if we just realized that we had a problem with Hispanic voters in 2011.
Although I'm constantly beating the drum to get more donors to help out the conservative new media, our #1 financial priority as a party should be minority outreach. We need our own National Council of La Raza and our own MEChA. We need more Hispanic blogs, more Hispanic talk radio and Hispanic conservatives who can take our message to places where it isn't getting a fair hearing today. We need Hispanic conservatives calling out the Democrats for their disgusting, patronizing and racist comments about Hispanics and we need to have their voices amplified by the big websites and talk radio hosts out there.
Now, will this take money, time and effort? Yes. Will everybody like this kind of change? No. Will it fix everything in one or two election cycles? No. But, is this exactly the kind of hard work we need to start doing year in and year out to level the playing field with Hispanic Americans? Yes, it is. The more time we spend focusing on a gimmicky, sure-to-fail Hail Mary like amnesty, the less time we'll spend making the changes that can bring Hispanic Americans home to where they belong, in the conservative movement.
5) Why does anyone think amnesty would allow the GOP to capture the current Hispanic vote? There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to assume that the GOP would be able to capture the Hispanic vote if we pass an amnesty. None. Zero. Zilch. If that's all it takes, well, keep in mind that Reagan signed on to a "one time" comprehensive illegal immigration plan while he was in office. So, if it's all about amnesty, why aren't Hispanics already voting Republican? By that same logic, why aren't all black Americans voting for the Republican Party today since, percentage wise, more Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act than Democrats?
Here's a hint: The Democrats are beating us with Hispanics by around 70/30, blacks 90/10, Jews 70/30, Muslims 80/20 and Asians 75/25. They're not doing that by signing on to major legislation; they're doing it with identity politics. Incidentally, nothing would change if we signed on to an amnesty because Republicans will never be able to hand out more free goodies than the Democrats. If we offer a legal status short of citizenship, the Democrats will offer citizenship and say we hate Hispanics because we won't do it. If we offer citizenship in 10 years, they'll offer it in five and say we're dragging our feet because we hate Hispanics. If we offered amnesty for every illegal tomorrow, Democrats would ask for a new amnesty every year for anyone who sneaks across the border and they'd say that we hate Hispanics if we disagree. Then, over the long haul, the percentages for Hispanic voters wouldn't change much at all because as we've seen, the tactics the Democrats are using have been proven to work again and again. The Democrats understand that, so why don't we get it? If you're actually naive enough to believe that amnesty will bring Hispanics over to the GOP, then ask yourself a simple question: Do you really think the Democrats would strongly support a policy that’s going to cost them millions of votes?
All true. And one more reason. When you reward something, you get more of it.
As soon as somebody can tell me 1) why these “immigrants” should not have to comply with the same rules as all others, and 2) why the rules should have to change to accommodate people merely unwilling to comply with them, I might consider talking about “amnesty”. Oh, and how ‘bout that whole, “We fought a tyrant and won - go clean up your own back yard” thing? Does saying, “Be willing to shed your own blood for your own country rather than breaking the rules of my country and then demanding that WE change” make me a bad person? Tango Sierra. To quote Don Quixote, they need “to be willing to march into hell for a heavenly cause”.
Blacks , Hispanics , and Israeli hating Jews are not going to vote for Republicans no matter what they do.
Romney knew that, he called it, wasting time on the 47%.
These people are already bought and paid for by Democrats using the Republican workers taxed money.
Reagan (the greatest conservative president ever!) had an amnesty program.
He unfortunately trusted Congress that they would couple it with border control, and got screwed.....
This is an issue that must be dealt with in a thoughtful, compassionate manner without rhetoric or hyperbole.... Screaming about 20 foot fences and moats with alligators doesn't cut it....
How to handle it is subject to debate.
However, the Hispanic vote is NOT locked to Democrats. Hispanic voters values are more aligned with conservative values than liberal.
There are ways to address the issue, adhere to our principle, resolve the problem and win the Hispanic vote for all time....
During the primary, Newt articulated one of them....
Reagan gave them amnesty and the GOP has barely broken 40% since.
Best reason I can think of.
If you are going to play brazen racial realpolitik than at least make it count.
Nominating another Dole-McCain-Romney type would be as well.
Well I for one have to say if they do amnesty, I’m done with them.
The left asks their pols to lie cheat and steal for them and they do it.
All we ask from ours is just to advocate conservatism most of the time and they continually fall short.
I’m sick of it.
Well I for one have to say if they do amnesty, I’m done with them.
The left asks their pols to lie cheat and steal for them and they do it.
All we ask from ours is just to advocate conservatism most of the time and they continually fall short.
I’m sick of it.
Only one reason is needed. America would be finished.
amnesty is the new debt ceiling.
they’ll just do another and kick the can down the road.
The Repub’s haven’t put up a real conservative since Reagan....That’s why they haven’t broken 40%....
It’s not a brazen race pandering issue but a real issue that needs to be addressed. It can be made into a race bait....That’s what the liberal demoncrats do...
We can address the issue with conservative values and address some of the concerns of the Hispanic community.....There is no leadership within the Republican party on this issue....The best i’ve seen is Newt so far....
even if immigrants all voted republican, would it matter?
we’ll still be bankrupt and going there even faster. it’s a fact that immigrants, legal AND illegal , use social services at a higher rate than others. we can’t even afford to support our born and raised American moocher class, let alone a whole class of poor with anchor babies.
you import more poor(into a welfare state) and you get more poverty.
Could be...until the GOP-E gives all the illegal aliens the vote.
You see the problem?
It "is" possible to "do amnesty" without "giving...illegal aliens the vote". It's called "permanent residency". NO illegal who willingly came here in violation of our laws should ever be allowed to vote.....period. Children brought here by such illegals should be eligible to apply for citizenship at age 21 "if" they have maintained a squeaky-clean legal record, are self-supporting, or served a term in an arm of the US military.
Sort of a slave labor force?
What do you think happens to a nation with millions of permanent foreigners who have no voting power to control their own lives?
When is the treatment of American citizens in Mexico and their rights vs US treatment of Mexicans going to be an issue when we discuss amnesty ?
Ever hear of resciprocal aggrements ? These are arranged to protect the rights of American citizens working or living in other countries.
Why is it when it comes to citizens of other countries we are required to offer them the same privledges as we do to US citizens? But when it comes to US citizens who get in trouble or attempt to do business in other countries they do not get the same treatment their citizens get.
Americans can’t own coast land in Mexico. And get no title to it elsewhere. If they run out of cash they’ll get unceremoniously sent back or put in jail untill some relative comes up with the “fresh”. That’s just for starters as for granting them voting privledges yea let’s give Mexican citizens that right when American citizens vote in their elections .
The fundamental flaw in this piece is that it’s based on the premise that the GOP hasn’t already committed political suicide.
Absolute NONSENSE! Biggest political myth of the past 30 years. "Hispanic values" = WELFARE STATE. Period. Hispanic immigrants receive welfare 4 times as often as other immigrants. 71% of illegal aliens in TX receive at least one form of welfare. They get freebies and they want more. MUCH more. And Democrats are the pushers. You can't beat Santa Claus.
Also, if Reagan's amnesty was so "compassionate" and popular with Hispanics, then why did George H.W. Bush get a horrid 30% of their vote just 2 years later?
100% complete and total bunk and BS .....go spend a little time in El Paso or what’s left of small towns in the Texas Panhandle and tell me these illegals have conservative values .....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.