Posted on 07/25/2013 10:45:49 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
House Republicans have steered clear of the Senate’s comprehensive immigration reform bill and its approach, pledging to proceed in steps to overhauling the nation’s immigration system instead. Democrats have been using that strategy as a way to paint the GOP as callous and unconcerned (at the least) about immigrants, especially their children. National Journal reports that Eric Cantor will try to turn the tables on that argument, daring Democrats to support border security in exchange for legalization of minors:
An emerging coalition of House Republicans is arguing that young immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children constitute “a special protected class” that should eventually be eligible for citizenship, an approach they say combines sound policy with smart politics. …
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., is the driving force behind the strategy to focus on legalizing undocumented youths. According to Republican aides, passing such a bill would equip Republicans with a reasonable answer to the question of what to do with the 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally. It would also force Democrats into a political lose-lose: Either endorse a GOP proposal that legalizes so-called “Dreamers” or oppose this longtime policy goal and hold out for blanket legalization for the entire undocumented community.
As one House leadership aide framed it, “How can they say no to the kids?”
Cantor’s push, which has the blessing of Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, is also endorsed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and several influential conservatives such as Reps. Raul Labrador of Idaho and Jim Jordan of Ohio. It’s still earlyCantor and company have yet to release any legislative languagebut lawmakers predict that such a measure will garner majority support in the oft-fractured House Republican Conference.
That would turn the calculus back onto the Democrats. Polls show that Americans back a path to citizenship anyway, but have much more sympathy for children whose only crime was that their parents carried them into the country. Polls have definitely shown that Americans want border security addressed as the priority in reform, even if they prefer a comprehensive approach rather than piecemeal. Such an offer would combine the most popular parts of the plans floating around Washington for most of the last decade, and force the Democrats instead of the Republicans to decide between children and their political hobby horses.
That is, it will — if Cantor and Boehner can get enough Republican votes to force Democrats to choose. So far, the strategy seems to be gaining ground, at least since this weekend. Trey Gowdy, who would normally be considered a tough vote, pointed out at a hearing this week that our law treats children as a different class in other ways, too — and that minors brought by parents “have not committed a crime,” a key position for those opposed to any form of amnesty for border violators. Ted Poe (R-TX) emphasized that children did not have the determination to act illegally, and “therefore, they should be treated in a special way.”
This all hinges on the border-security package developed by the House, of course. The Corker-Hoeven amendment turned out to be Swiss cheese in practice, and the White House made the issue all but moot by declaring that it could ignore statutes in ObamaCare that specifically had to do with mandates and triggers. Unless the House comes up with a tougher border security package and a way to ensure that the Obama administration has no choice but to fund it — perhaps by holding up the DREAMer funding until specific metrics are met, especially on a border fence — then this is probably all academic anyway. But at least Republicans may force Democrats to “say no to the kids,” and get rid of that noxious talking point for a while.
Exactly. Why is it that Mexico and her citizens are afforded border security, but we are not? Guatemala should demand an open border with Mexico...see where that goes.
If the border is secured (Ha!), why would we then have an obligation to legalize those who BROKE OUR LAWS? Bob
House Republicans would be smart to ignore any legislation that has to do with a pathway to citizenship, regardless of how strong the border security language is. As sure as I’m sitting here, the pathway to citizenship will happen long before the border is actually secured.
There is no way - none - that true border security will ever happen.
Democrats want the illegals here as a source of votes.
Many Republicans want the illegals here as a source of cheap labor.
Only a small number of Republicans actually want to secure the border. Given that’s the case, this idea that we’ll get border security before any “pathway to citizenship” is theater.
Don’t fall for it.
I hope the Repubs pull a page out of the Dem playbook by making the Dems put up the fence first, and then ignore the request for amnesty.
The security will be a 10-year project and never get done but legalization will happen immediately
I guess. But how many apple pickers, maids and gardeners do we need?
The GOP has no intention of deporting the foreign nationals who are illegally squatting in the USA.
Without deportation you have defacto amnesty.
I won’t vote for politicians who will not enforce the law no matter which Party they belong to.
Especially when our highest unemployment rate is among unskilled and semi-skilled workers.
and judges won’t let us cut off benefits to illegals, which would probably get most of them to pack up and leave
Hint to Congress, they are called illegal. What difference will more laws make?!
In addition to its hypocrisy in demanding open borders with the US and closed borders with Guatemala, I always get a laugh out of Mexican government officials who accuse US immigration opponents of “racism.” In Mexico, your status in society is largely determined by how much European (as opposed to Indian) blood you have. That’s why they don’t want Indio immigrants from Guatemala, and why the Mexican elite wants to dump all of their surplus Indios and Mestizos on us.
Yes, call your congress critter often and thank it for supporting 4th of July gang rape of a 13 year old and the rape and murder of 93 year old grandma. Just search on the topic and you will find lots more illegal alien rapists than valedictorians. Call and thank them in your best NPR voice.
Don’t forget about the drunken illegal aliens who kill also.
Question? How many rapes and vehicular DWI homicides are allowed before they are excluded from citizenship?
Apparently 36. You're out after your 37th!
There’s nothing ‘special’ about the illegal children of illegals raised here. Even if they were the legal children of diplomats or businessmen who happened to grow up here legally, they wouldn’t be due some special US citizenship—and that should apply even less for illegals!
Talk about perverse incentives!
The Republicans understand this perfectly. They want the illegals in here as much as the Democrats.
Every single Republican congressman, that utters a word in support of any type of legalization, amnesty, etc, should immediately be challenged by someone in their district.
Even if the person has not intention/chance of winning, someone should just come forward and state their intention to run against them, just for uttering those words. I’d bet that most would quickly rethink their thinking when it comes to this subject.
And, there’s been bills presented that the money from places like Western Union be taxed, since so much of it was cash. From what I remember, the amount of revenue from the money sent back home would be significant, but of course the lobbyists jumped in like a pack of wolves and that was it.
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.