Posted on 01/22/2014 8:46:17 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
A nice example of what I said last week about Republicans forging their immigration policy based not on what works but on what they think they can sell. Legalization without citizenship is, as DrewM says, arguably the worst possible outcome policy-wise. It rewards illegals by letting them stay in the U.S. indefinitely, creating an incentive for future illegals to cross the border, but then tries to punish them by relegating them to a status of uncertainty. Will they ever be allowed to apply for citizenship or will they be stuck forever as second-class quasi-citizens? No one knows. And no one in the GOP leadership really cares. They like this dopey idea because they think they can sell it to both sides. To conservatives, they can crow that they held the line and refused to create a special path to citizenship like Rubio and the Gang of Eight did. To amnesty shills, they can crow that they’ve given illegals a legal foothold to stay and work here in the U.S., with citizenship through some process inevitable in the fullness of time. The goal isn’t to produce smart policy or to solve the problem of illegal immigration. The goal is to kinda sorta placate the conservative base whose votes they need while wooing the left-leaning Latinos whose votes they want.
And the punchline, of course, is that it’ll make no one happy. Conservative media will paint this, correctly, as a sellout and pro-amnesty groups will begin agitating for full citizenship within minutes after a legalization bill passes. McCarthy himself, I assume, knows that it’s garbage as policy but feels he has no choice but to push it because he comes from a California district with a significant Latino population.
McCarthy stated his personal view on the contentious issue in an interview with KBAK/KBFX Eyewitness News in his hometown of Bakersfield, Calif. He signaled that the call for a provisional legal status would be included in the immigration reform principles House Republican leaders are soon to release.
“The principles aren’t written yet, but in my personal belief, I think it’ll go with legal status that will allow you to work and pay taxes,” McCarthy said.
McCarthy made clear he did not favor carving out a new path to citizenship for the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally. But his position appears to comport with the views of other senior Republicans who have called for illegal immigrants to have access to the existing route to citizenship once they receive an initial legal status and fulfill other requirements…
Immigration advocates have targeted McCarthy, whose district includes a large Hispanic population.
“[I]t is unclear whether Democrats would back such a compromise,” says the Hill. I don’t think it’s that unclear. Easy solution: The GOP could create a path to citizenship for DREAMers, which they seem inclined to do anyway, and offer that to Democrats in return for legalization without citizenship for adult illegals. Democrats will happily take that half-loaf. They want a deal so that they can show their Latino base that they finally delivered on immigration, but they also don’t want to lose their ability to demagogue Republicans as racist. Legalization without citizenship — i.e. “Jim Crow for illegals,” as the new lefty talking point will describe it — plus a DREAM amnesty allows them to do both. They’d be nuts to turn it down. As long as they don’t have to wait until border security has been measurably improved before legalization takes effect, they’ve got 90 percent of what they wanted from this process.
By the way, remember when Jeb Bush endorsed this idea too? It’s still bizarre to me that the great establishment hope, who’s supposed to be the GOP’s last, best chance to woo Latinos, would back a plan that’ll soon be compared by Democrats everywhere to segregation, but I guess he needed a gimmick to distinguish himself from Rubio after Rubio took the lead on comprehensive reform in the Senate. I’m curious to see if Bush sticks with it now that Rubio and his other presumptive centrist rival Chris Christie are fading.
Exit question: If Congress doesn’t pass some sort of reform before the midterms, Obama’s going to do it with via his presidential super powers, right?
The ALIENS finally got to Kevin McCarthy.
The goal is to kinda sorta placate the conservative base whose votes they need while wooing the left-leaning Latinos whose votes they want.
This is a dumba** goal. It certainly didn’t help Republicans after 1986 amnesty.
So there would be taxation without representation. Talk about a winning issue for Democrats in future elections!
How about your political career is over.
No Amnesty. Not Now. Not EVER.
Go ahead morons. Make the commie lib, Federal activist "judges'" day. Those piggies already got this figured out.
NO!.... Ship illegals back to their home country, confiscate their valuables to fund their returns if they cannot afford the cost.
Registration then Deportation...
DAMN IDIOTS!
The above suggests that Dems would still have trouble accepting legalization with no citizenship, even though they are getting desperate for a deal.(looks like play acting)
But I noticed today that my House rep who is a lib Dem says NOTHING about citizenship on his website under issues>immigration. I called him up and complained about that.
If you have a Dem as a representative call him and Demand full citizenship as a condition of ANY deal, and I can help you with exactly what to say to convince him you are serious.
If you have a GOP as a representative, you could call him and Demand no citizenship at all for anyone, be a condition of a deal, Or whatever you think will work.
Great generals win battles with two pronged attacks from multiple sides.
I'd prefer action via governors.
Jeff Sessions warned that the nation’s undocumented immigrants would “be able to immediately apply for much better jobs than they currently have.” “Maybe they were working at a restaurant part time. Now they’re going to be truck drivers, heavy-equipment operators competing at the factories and plants and we’ve got an unemployment rate that’s very high,” he said.
Just see my tag line. It explains everything.
In my state Martin O Malley’s Dems passed a law explicitly giving drivers licenses to illegals, where-as before the law had a loophole in it allowing fraudulent documentation from other countries for illegals to use.
The problem is to meet federal requirements the licenses are marked ‘not to be used for federal IDs’ so they clearly identify illegals. A special marked drivers license for illegals.
No, no, no...All you crazy purists repeat after me.
All together now!
“The dems are worse, it’s a lesser evil and I’ll Vote Republican NO MATTER WHAT!”
There. Now don’t you feel better?
I would support that, so long as they’re also never eligible for welfare, but you know as soon as they do this, the leftists will start pining for how “unfair” it is, and they’ll get welfare, citizenship, voting, etc. So since you know the left can’t be trusted to stand by a deal, there’s no point in doing anything except drawing a line in the sand.
Well the first lawsuit on this will end up with them all getting citizenship. We know the drill by now.
The real costs are the entitlement programs. Heritage estimated it will cost $6.3 trillion. And what about the tens of millions the lawbreakers will sponsor to enter this country thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification?
Conferring rights and privileges upon illegal aliens has a corrosive effect on the Rule of Law, the very foundation of our Republic. It is also a slap in the face to legal immigrants who have followed the rules and obeyed the laws. There are over 4 million intending immigrants waiting their turn overseas to enter the U.S. legally. They have completed the paperwork, had physicals and background checks. Putting the lawbreakers at the head of the line allowing them to stay and work here sends the wrong message.
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.
