NH GOP chair: Scott Walker told us he supported a path to legalization for illegals, not citizenship

Hotair ^ | 03/27/2015 | AllahPundit

[SeekAndFind]

So, to recap: The Wall Street Journal claimed yesterday that Walker told an audience of New Hampshire Republicans that he supported a path to citizenship, which was — supposedly — a flip-flop from what Walker’s been telling reporters lately about opposing “amnesty.” Except that it’s not a flip-flop, as I tried to explain. Walker’s supported a path to citizenship for nearly 15 years. As recently as this month, when asked by Chris Wallace if he can imagine a path to citizenship if illegals paid a penalty first, he replied, “I believe there’s a way you can do that.” No flip-flop!

This, however, is a flip-flop:

“Gov. Walker has been very clear that he does not support amnesty and believes that border security must be established and the rule of law must be followed,” [Walker spokesman Kirsten] Kukowski said. “His position has not changed, he does not support citizenship for illegal immigrants, and this story line is false.”

That’s the statement Walker’s team put out yesterday afternoon as buzz built among righties over the WSJ story. Walker told Wallace a few weeks ago that he’d changed his mind on the need for border security; now, under fire over immigration again, he’s changed his mind on the rest of the issue and abandoned a path to citizenship too. No amnesty of any sort for illegals!

But wait. Here’s New Hampshire Republican Party chair Jennifer Horn, who was at the event described by the Journal:

“I specifically asked a follow-up question on the immigration reform issue, where he very clearly identified he was advocating a path for legal status but not citizenship,” Horn said in an interview with The Associated Press…

In the half-hour discussion, Walker called for securing the border and allowing for more visas for high-skilled workers. He also said it was unreasonable to deport millions of immigrants in the country illegally, preferring a system that allowed them to pay back taxes and achieve legal status over time, according to Horn.

“The governor was very specific that he was not advocating for citizenship for illegal immigrants,” Horn said.

Aha! So the Journal was wrong — Walker supports giving illegals a path to legal status not not full-fledged citizenship. Or is Horn lying to cover for him? The WSJ says three different people at the event confirmed that Walker talked about citizenship, not just legalization. How did all three of them get it wrong? And if Horn’s telling the truth, where does that leave us in terms of Walker’s “evolution” on this issue? On March 1st, in his interview with Wallace, he was pro-citizenship; on March 13th, at the dinner in New Hampshire, he was pro-legalization but anti-citizenship; yesterday, in his spokesman’s response to the Journal story, he was anti-citizenship but silent on legalization. I hate to use foul language on a family blog but there’s only one word for this performance: Romneyesque.

And the punchline is, none of it matters. Sincere border hawks know that there’s no meaningful distinction between supporting legalization and supporting citizenship. If illegals win the right to stay in the U.S. and work, political pressure from Democrats and demographic pressure from Latino voters will build on Congress to grant them a path to citizenship eventually. In fact, for an aspiring GOP presidential nominee, it’s arguably dumber to support legalization without citizenship than to suck it up and call for citizenship too. By withholding citizenship from illegals, you leave yourself open to the charge that you want them stuck in perpetual second-class status. That won’t earn Walker the goodwill he’s seeking from Latino voters; meanwhile, his (alleged) support for legalization and his ridiculous slipperiness on this subject is costing him goodwill among conservatives. If you’re going to pander to a key voting bloc, choose one and pander your ass off. Don’t try this ridiculous straddle where you try to make amnesty fans and border hawks happy by splitting the baby and supporting legalization but not citizenship. Trying to please everyone usually means pleasing no one.

Actually, there’s another punchline here. Assuming Horn is right and that Walker’s new position is legalization without citizenship, that means he’s engaging in the same sort of amnesty pander as — ta da — his chief rival, Jeb Bush. Remember, Jeb also claims that he opposes citizenship for adult illegals (although not for DREAMers), which is his own crude attempt to blunt attacks on his immigration position from the right. No one believes that Bush 45 would hold the line on that once in office, though; Jeb saying he opposes citizenship is exactly as credible as Obama saying in 2008 that he opposes gay marriage. If in fact Scott Walker’s new position is what Horn says, i.e. pro-legalization but anti-citizenship, then I suspect he came to that position for no better reason than that it’s also Jeb’s position, which means the issue will be more or less neutralized if the race eventually turns into a “Bush versus Walker” one-on-one. And if instead Jeb flames out and Marco Rubio supplants him as the great establishment hope, Walker can then argue that Rubio’s more of an amnesty fan than he himself is. After all, Rubio’s Gang of Eight bill endorsed a path to citizenship. And Scott Walker very deeply opposes such things, don’tcha know.

Exit question I’d never thought I’d ask: Among Bush, Christie, Walker, and Rubio, the establishment’s fab four, is Rubio actually the most trustworthy on immigration? Good lord.

[GeronL]

Even without citizenship it is still amnesty. Besides, they all know it will take a month or so for a federal judge to find a constitutional right to get them citizenship.

[Yosemitest]

FLIP-FLOPPER.

I quote Scott Walker and his PRO-AMNESTY position:

Endorses path to citizenship for immigrant workers

Scott Walker distanced himself from House Republicans debating a new immigration bill by endorsing a path to citizenship for immigrant workers.Walker acknowledged that a substantial number of Wisconsin farms depend on migrant workers, some of them here illegally.
He also was sharply critical of how difficult the federal government makes it for those workers to come to this country.
"If people want to come here and work hard and benefit, I don't care whether they come from Mexico or Ireland or Germany or Canada or South Africa or anywhere else," he said.
"I want them here."
The Democratic-led U.S. Senate passed an immigration bill last week that features a path to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S.
Many conservative House Republicans oppose the bill, viewing it as rewarding law-breakers.
He said as a gubernatorial candidate in 2010 that he would sign an Arizona-style bill, which would allow local police to stop suspected illegal immigrants.
Source: Wisconsin Rapids Tribune, "Endorses path to citizenship" , Jul 3, 2013

Make it easier to enter the country legally

Walker said he is in favor of the Senate immigration bill--that features a path to citizenship--but called it a backward "Band-Aid" approach,
saying elected leaders should make it easier for people to enter the country and become legal citizens in the first place.
"Not only do they need to fix things for people already here, or find some way to do it, there's got to be a larger way to fix the system in the first place," he said.
"Because if it wasn't so cumbersome, if there wasn't such a long wait, if it wasn't so difficult to get in, we wouldn't have the other problems that we have (with people living here illegally)," he said.
Walker's stance on immigration reform evolved over the years.
Source: Wisconsin Rapids Tribune, "Endorses path to citizenship" , Jul 3, 2013

2010: stop suspected illegals; 2012: that's a distraction

Walker's stance on immigration reform evolved over the years.
He said as a gubernatorial candidate in 2010 that he would sign an Arizona-style bill, which would allow local police to stop suspected illegal immigrants, if he were elected.
Then, in December 2012, Walker said he no longer favored such a bill, telling reporters that such legislation would become a "huge distraction" from accomplishing his agenda for the state.
Today, Walker said he would support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants under some circumstances.
Source: Wisconsin Rapids Tribune, "Endorses path to citizenship" , Jul 3, 2013

[stars & stripes forever]

Words mean something.

[Tennessee Nana]

legalization is citizenship..

if youre legally here youre on your way to naturalization..

does Walker think we don’t know the difference ???

I hope Cruz gets this guy out early in the debates..

[ilgipper]

I am still not sure where Walker lines up on this, but I do see a reasonable way for some here illegally to find legal worker status as part of a compromise solution. The fact is, people are here, they may have their families here, and their kids may well already be in our schools. If they are otherwise a proven good citizenship, I don’t see why they cannot opt in to a legal worker visa. With renewed border security first a verification effort for illegals without US ID to tighten the labor market, allowing people to become legal, start paying taxes and function in our rules is a better solution than the current situation. I know some here call this amnesty, but lumping that scenario in with Obama’s version or a Bush-like path to citzenship is not apples to apples. No one, including Cruz is proposing a mass round up of people to deport. This scenario seems like a reasonable compromise. While on their work visa, if they have legal issues, then they would need to face consequences.

[2ndDivisionVet]

The Bushes married into the Walker family, hence George Herbert WALKER Bush and George WALKER Bush. Is Scott one of those Walkers?

[Ouderkirk]

THEY NEED TO GO HOME !!!!

what pare of this do these clown need clarified ?

they are criminal aliens...and need to be expelled and not given the opportunity to return....EVER !!!

[C19fan]

Legalization without citizenship is a zero credibility policy. Once the illegals get their work papers the political pressure to put them on a path to citizenship will be overwhelming. Walker’s position is now the same as the latest one from Dauphin Bush.

[stephenjohnbanker]

The AZ Chamber of Commerce is flying Walker in for a meet.All expenses paid Media BARRED.

[stephenjohnbanker]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3272789/posts

[Tennessee Nana]

work papers will be a green card..

a green card is all that’s needed for citizenship..that and time in the US which the illegal aliens can easily have for real or not...

[Boogieman]

“The fact is, people are here, they may have their families here, and their kids may well already be in our schools. If they are otherwise a proven good citizenship, I don’t see why they cannot opt in to a legal worker visa.”

We don’t have enough jobs to go around for our own citizens at the moment. We have none to spare for these criminals.

[Andy'smom]

Out of those 4, I believe Rubio IS the most consistent.

[arthurus]

Cruz does not support deportation, either. Every damned one of them has been bought. We have NO representation in Washington nor will we get any. It does not matter what else a candidate is solid on; if he is not ready to get rid of the illegals he is for handing the government over to a permanent Democrat totalist regime. Call me a one-issue guy. Well there is one issue that renders all the others moot. Whatever the official status of the wetbacks and Visa overstays, so long as they are legally recognized as being here permanently they are a major political force and will decide elections and politicians' positions. With any legal position they will be a tremendous and growing drain on the economy.

[manc]

People say that we can’t ship millions out of the country .

Well we don’t have to.

We deal with this issue as we do in the legal way and that is you have 6 months to go back to your country and apply for a work visa at the American consulate. You wait for that visa while backgrounds check happen.

For those who do not go back to their country then after 6 months once they are caught they are shipped back at a cost to them or their family and will be on a list to never return here again.
If they are to try and return they are put in prison like the one with Sheriff Joe and then shipped back again.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Cruz does not support deportation, either. Every damned one of them has been bought.

Well, if this is the case, then even Mark Levin, our respected constitutionalist, did not come out in support of deportation, at least not for those who have been here since childhood.

Levin’s stance is quite similar to Ted Cruz’s stance — No amnesty now ( but they did not say no amnesty ever ). Secure the borders first, then when we’re satisfied that it is REALLY secure, we’ll talk about what to do with those kids, but not until.

Has Mark Levin been bought too?

[arthurus]

Any status above deportation sucks more illegals to the border and induces more people to lose their visas and disappear. Secure the border is not a useful policy.
Close the border accompanied by consistently imposed fines and jail for anyone who hires an illegal alien for anything at all and free egress at the border. Then start rounding up illegals. Latinos must be the main target. Round up groups of them and put them on old surplus freighters. Leave them in the harbor at Vera Cruz on those freighters and disable the engines. We don't have to do that to more than a couple of boatloads. The rest will head south to the border on their own volition..

[Reno89519]

Agreed, anything short of deporting illegal aliens is amnesty.

While not final, until a better candidate comes along, I'll favor Ted Cruz. And, yes, he is just as likely to accept amnesty, but at least he's not flip-flopping around with lies.

[SunkenCiv]

Walker Denies Remarks Indicating Change in Immigration Stance

• Rand Paul Wants Bigger GOP: 'You Go to a Republican Event and It's All White People'
• (Rand) Paul: GOP Needs to 'Look Like the Rest of America' to Win Again (again)
• Rand Paul slams Cliven Bundy's racist rant
• Rand Paul: Bundy's racist remarks are 'offensive'
• Rand Paul: I'm Open to Voting for Immigration Bill
• Paul: Still hope for immigration reform this year

Rand Paul's immigration speech

...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.

Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.

Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.

Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.

If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...

This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.

Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.

[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]

---

Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform

Latinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...

[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]

---

[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]