Posted on 07/18/2015 9:05:33 AM PDT by conservativejoy
So where is Scott Walker on immigration in 2015?
posted at 10:01 am on July 18, 2015 by Jazz Shaw
One other thing I missed as I was heading out to the mountains last week was the official announcement of Scott Walker as our roughly 238th presidential candidate on the Republican side. Unlike some of the other, shall we say… “overly ambitious” folks tossing their hats in the ring, Walker was obviously a serious contender and had been all but officially running for some time now. Some, like National Review’s Deroy Murdock, are painting Walker as the GOP’s Obi-Wan Kenobi… our last, best hope. His current position in the national polls indicates that this is a theory shared by a number of primary voters, since he’s sitting solidly within striking distance behind only Trump and Bush.
For the most part, I can’t complain about that. There’s a lot to like about Walker, both in terms of message and the substance of his record in Wisconsin. I’ve had the occasional disagreements with him on issues such as the Renewable Fuel Standard, but none of us are ever going to find a candidate we agree with 100% of the time on all things. But if there’s one nagging question which remains for me, it’s on the always critical issue of immigration. (A subject which I think most of you would agree is even more critical today than it was even a few years ago.) Walker’s record on this subject has been under examination by a lot of reporters this summer and it frankly is enough to give me pause.
We can start that journey by going back to 2002 when Walker was just beginning his tenure as County Executive for Milwaukee County. At that time, as reported by National Review, he signed a resolution in support of comprehensive immigration reform and came out repeatedly in support of legal status for illegal aliens.
Resolution advocates for “comprehensive immigration reform” that would ensure “greater opportunity for undocumented working immigrants to obtain legal residency in the United States.”
The, in 2006, during his first run at the Governor’s mansion, Walker backed a proposal from McCain and Kennedy which would have turned immigration policy on its head. (Via Politico)
“But the likely presidential candidate apparently stood on another side of that debate as the Milwaukee County Executive in 2006. That year, he signed a resolution calling on Congress to pass the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, a bill authored by John McCain and Teddy Kennedy that was denounced at the time by conservatives as ‘amnesty’ — and remains anathema to party activists.”
Walker lost that election, but as we all saw he went on to win in 2010. His position on immigration didn’t seem to change, though, and he was still singing pretty much the same tune as recently as 2013. At that time he was still pushing a pathway to citizenship. (From Politico)
“Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said Friday that he supports a pathway to citizenship to illegal immigrants but said that people who are waiting in line should have ‘first preference.’ ‘You’ve got to find a way to say that people who are in line right now have first preference,’ the Republican governor said at POLITICO’s third annual State Solutions Conference in Washington. Walker said that in addition to not having enough visas for immigrants is that the system in general is broken. ‘We just have a broken system. And to me, if somebody wants to come in and live the American dream and work hard … we should have a system that works and let’s people in,’ Walker told POLITICO’s Jonathan Martin at the event. He added: ‘The vast majority of people want to come here for the right reasons. They want to live the American dream.'”
Then, in just the last year (and well after it became clear that he was seriously looking at a presidential bid) the Governor seemed to have his Come to Jesus moment, as he described it to Fox News’ Chris Wallace. (Reported in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal)
Chris Wallace: But you said you supported [comprehensive reform].
Walker: And my view has changed. I’m flat out saying it. I’m — candidates can say that. Sometimes they don’t.
Wallace: So, you’ve changed from 2013?
Walker: Absolutely.
Nothing wrong with that. I’ve had my own views on some issues change considerably over the years from the pie in the sky (and frankly, uninformed) positions I held when I was younger. And if Walker looked over the problems with illegal aliens and the cost being paid by the nation as a result of these dangerously flawed policies, good for him. I’m happy to have him on board with the good guys. But was he really serious? This is the year when some of the nagging questions really popped up. Take, for example, the comments he is alleged to have made in New Hampshire. (From the Wall Street Journal)
“Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker told a private dinner of New Hampshire Republicans this month that he backed the idea of allowing undocumented immigrants to stay in the country and to eventually become eligible for citizenship, a position at odds with his previous public statements on the matter.”
But by April he was back on the hard line, secure the borders and enforce the law track. (Bloomberg)
“The next president and the next Congress need to make decisions about a legal immigration system that’s based on, first and foremost, on protecting American workers and American wages… The more I’ve talked to folks—I’ve talked to Senator Sessions and others out there, but it is a fundamentally lost issue by many in elected positions today—is what is this doing for American workers looking for jobs, what is this doing to wages, and we need to have that be at the forefront of our discussion going forward.”
There were some other instances of varying credibility in terms of the reporting. People spent a fair amount of time talking up the comments he allegedly made to Stephen Moore on the subject, but that report was later walked back. With that in mind, I’m not gong to assign a lot of weight to that report, but the private donor meeting in New Hampshire is troubling.
So what will Walker really do about immigration if elected? It’s not enough for me to discount him entirely and I think he deserves the chance to clear this up for us during the debates. Even if he’s shaky on the subject, I certainly wouldn’t rule out supporting him if he’s the eventual nominee. There is still, as I said at the beginning, a lot to like about Walker. He could use a bit more polish in terms of running a campaign and dealing with the national press, but he’ll continue to get that workout as he moves forward. If nothing else, he should really turn around the National Labor Relations Board.
Still, this history on immigration is enough to put me on edge a bit. Let’s wait and see what he’s got to say on the debate stage and in his upcoming stump speeches. Food for thought, though.
Walker will say what he needs to say and do whatever the Chamber of Commerce and the cheap labor lobby tell him to do.
I wish I knew.
It does not inspire confidence that he’s not been clearly on the side of the rule of law and the citizens.
His most recent remarks about “high standard” do not give me the comfortable feeling that he won’t find some way to explain away why he may eventually give citizenship (even in some supposedly tortuous path of hurdles to be met).
The fact that he won’t say “no citizenship for illegals - ever” is extremely telling to me.
Without a degree he will get slammed on national stage.
He’s done some good stuff, but people want more than a high school graduate for President.
This is the biggest issue we face. If a candidate does not even mention it when he announces and Conservatives can’t nail down his position, it certainly speaks volumes.
I haven’t found a soul who can tell me what this guy wants to accomplish as President. Nothing about it even on his own website.
He is flip-flopping. Where else would you expect Walker to be on a critical issue?
Walker is wherever his buddy Norquist and the Cheap Labor Express tells him to be.
After those three, I have no other prospects to look forward to.
GO CRUZ!!!
Public Service announcement - be sure to use the link in 2ndDivisionVet's tagline to donate to Cruz - and do it often even if only for a few bucks a shot....
Walker will say what he needs to say and do whatever the Chamber of Commerce and the cheap labor lobby tell him to do.
Yep. Give me Cruz or Trump.
He chooses a few points to reinforce, and then moves on to others. He's highlighting other issues right now.....Iran, Planned Parenthood, 2A.
Right now Donald Trump is sucking all the air out of the room with regards to immigration....why try to make your case to the public when you won't be noticed?
All I'm saying is to sit back and listen for a while. It's a long way to next August. If, when he presents his platform on immigration you don't like it, fine....cross him off the list...that's what I will do as well.(although I'm sure the nominee will be pretty much sewn up before I get a chance to vote....it always is.)
This is the biggest issue we face. If a candidate does not even mention it when he announces and Conservatives can’t nail down his position, it certainly speaks volumes.
I haven’t found a soul who can tell me what this guy wants to accomplish as President. Nothing about it even on his own website.
By comparison, Bush gets a D+, Trump a B-, Cruz a C, and Rubio a D. Santorum is the highest rated with an A.
This is the most encouraging statement. Only Santorum and Walker are talking about limiting or reducing legal immigration. Why are we bringing in 1.1 million legal permanent immigrants annually (1.24 million in 2015) when we have the lowest labor participation rates in 38 years. Immigrants use the welfare system to a much greater degree than the native born. We are importing poverty and changing the demographics of this country forever. Since 1990 over 30 million legal permanent immigrants have entered this country.
I like the fact that he is talking with Jeff Sessions on this issue.
Exactly.
None of this overcomes the very bad feeling I get with his “high standard” for the illegal alien comments recently.
To me, giving 40-50 million illegal criminals (that 12 million number is a lie) any chance at citizenship and any actions about reducing legal immigration pales in comparison to me.
You can’t put enough lipstick or cheap perfume on that turd, frankly.
Yawn. That’s nice.
We have too many legal immigrants
Ahead of the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition event, Walker hardened his positions on issues considered litmus tests for social conservatives, including abortion and immigration. He suggested in an interview with Glenn Beck that there are too many legal immigrants, a position to the right of other 2016 hopefuls.
Source: N. Y. Times on 2015 Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition summit , Apr 25, 2015
2013: Comprehensive reform; 2015: no, that’s amnesty
Q: Back when you were the Milwaukee County executive, you actually supported the Kennedy-McCain comprehensive immigration plan. As part of a comprehensive plan—tough enforcement, E-Verify, the 11 million people already here paid penalty—should they get citizenship?
WALKER: No, I’m not talking about amnesty.
Q: But you said you supported it.
WALKER: And my view has changed. I’m flat out saying it. Candidates can say that. Sometimes they don’t.
Q: So, you’ve changed from 2013?
WALKER: Absolutely. I look at the problems we’ve experienced for the last few years. I’ve talked to governors on the border and others out there. I’ve talked to people all across America. And the concerns I have is that we need to secure the border. We ultimately need to put in place a system that works. A legal immigration system that works. And part of doing this is put the onus on employers, getting them E-Verify and tools to do that. But I don’t think you do it through amnesty.
Source: Fox News Sunday 2015 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Mar 1, 2015
No amnesty; close the back door & enforce the law
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker (R) declared “there should be no amnesty” at CPAC. When asked what he believes should be done with illegal immigrants already in the country, he stated “there should be no amnesty. You should secure the border, not just for immigration reasons, but why would you put a fence around 3 sides of your home and leave the back door open? That’s what we have when we guard our ports, we guard our airports, we don’t guard our borders—beyond that you’ve got to enforce the law. We put the onus on employers to give them an E-Verify type system where they have access to enforce the law.”
Regarding DHS funding and funding for the president’s executive action on immigration, he said “you have got to tie the two together, and instead of playing on defense you have got to play on offense and put the pressure back on the president and his allies.”
Source: Breitbart.com on 2015 Conservative Political Action Conf. , Feb 26, 2015
No amnesty; but no mass deportation & no executive action
Should the government offer immigrants already living in the US illegally a pathway to citizenship? Walker’s stance is unclear: “First, Obama’s executive action should be repealed,” a spokesperson said. “After that, we need absolute security at our borders and then we can address fixing our legal immigration system and deal with those here illegally, but amnesty is not the answer.”
In a February interview, Walker reiterated that he is not for “amnesty,” but also does not favor mass deportation: “I’m not an advocate of the plans that have been pushed here in Washington,” Walker said. “In the end, we need to enforce the laws of the US, and we need to find a way for people to have a legitimate legal immigration system in this country, and that doesn’t mean amnesty.”
In 2013, however, Walker voiced some support for a pathway to citizenship. Walker was asked if “with the right penalties & waiting periods & meeting the requirements, people could get citizenship?” “Sure,” he said at the time.
Source: National Journal 2016 series: Republicans on immigration , Feb 23, 2015
The RNC policy group supports amnesty.
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.