Posted on 02/14/2015 3:04:05 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Andrew Johnson of NRO reports that in 2002, as executive of Milwaukee County, Scott Walker signed a resolution that expressed support for “comprehensive immigration reform” that will “provide greater opportunity for undocumented working immigrants to obtain legal residency.” The author of the resolution says that Walker definitely supported it. Having signed it, he should be presumed to have supported, in any case.
Will this news harm Walker’s chances of becoming the GOP presidential nominee? Standing alone, it shouldn’t.
It’s one thing to sign a non-bonding resolution passed by the legislature in favor of “greater opportunity” for legal residency. It’s quite another to work with Chuck Schumer, as Marco Rubio did, to propose and guide to passage a Senate bill that confers both legal residency and a path to citizenship.
The potential problem I see for Walker resides not in his 2002 executive action, but in much more recent statements the governor has made in which he appeared to support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. In a Republican primary, I could vote for a candidate who, years ago, signed a resolution like the one from Milwaukee. I doubt that I could not vote for a candidate who backs a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally.
Let’s look, then, at the two statements I know about in which Walker is said to have backed a path to citizenship. One was made in mid-2013 at an editorial board meeting of a newspaper in Wassau, Wisconsin. Walker agreed that if the immigration system is fixed, he “can envision a world where the people who are here [illegally] can get citizenship” and he added that this “makes sense.” This statement doesn’t amount to advocating a path to citizenship under current conditions, but it’s not the “hell no” position many of us would have preferred.
The other statement was made to Politico in March 2013. Walker said that once people who are “waiting in line” have been processed for citizenship, “if there’s a way to set up a process to enable people to come in and have a legal pathway, that’s something we have to embrace.”
There is wiggle room in this comment, but not much. Again, Walker comes across as “squishy” at best about a path to citizenship.
I’ve characterized Scott Walker, as well as Marco Rubio, as a “bridge candidate” — i.e., as occupying the space between center-right “establishment” candidates like Jeb Bush and down-the-line conservative candidates like Ted Cruz. One potential virtue of bridge candidacy is the ability to win centrist votes in a general election without being as centrist as, say, Jeb Bush.
Walker’s squishy statements about illegal immigration are not inconsistent with being a bridge candidate. But they do raise doubts as to whether Walker truly is less centrist than Bush on one of the two issues that make people think of Bush as a centrist (the other is Common Core). Accordingly, Walker’s comments could cost him the ability to continue making major inroads with the conservative base in states like Iowa.
Walker is going to have to think hard about exactly where to position himself on amnesty and a path to citizenship and, if he moves towards a harder line, how to square his position with past actions and statements.
He is waffling, but he has too. He started out with Jebs position on illegal immigration. Is he for real? I do not know.
Sadly you are so right. I grieve for our country when even good people like those on here are so ignorant that they are blinded by hatred for Walker.
Oh your awesome, but not today.......lol. So you went from he is the devil to oh well maybe he is better than I thought. Come on. You want to support Walker so badly that it is oozing out of your posts.
All the candidates make my a$$ suck air.
That link is to a Leftist misstatement of Walker’s position, and the title is a distortion of even that. Did you not bother to actually read it?
Walker has said nothing in favor of mass deportations. He opposes Obama like McConnell, Boehner, and all the GOPe does—because it is an unconstitutional overreach and the Republicans are eager to be able to at least share the credit for “immigration reform”.
lol. That is very funny and kinda accurate for all of us.
SUre, I’m fine with giving Walker some accolades—I just don’t want him anywhere near national office.
WHat should worry you is how badly the GOPe does.
I think I'll punt on that one.
“I trust Walker to secure the borders more than I do Bush, Christie, Huckabee, or Paul.”
There’s one significant name you didn’t include on that list :)
“He is the ONLY conservative in the group and should be respected and cherished and not ridiculed like is being done on every thread.”
This just invalidates anything else you said.
Did you read the article yourself? It’s hardly flattering to Walker.
It seems to me that you only read the headline which is very misleading. Walker never stated he was for deportation. This is about signing onto the lawsuit against Obama’s executive action. Walker has already explained why he did this. It was because he does not believe that the President has the power to do this and that immigration laws need to go through the Congress.
If you have a quote of Walker’s that says he is for mass deportation then kindly share it with the rest of us.
Honestly it’s his one major issue of weakness. If’he can get right on this and either a) realize the true implication for America and change, and/or b) say bye to the US Chamber of Commerce and change, he has no major flaws anywhere else in his views.
That we know of, right now. Correct?
yes. but I have known him since the 1990s, and I know his positions. this immigration thing is very bad. he is good and solid otherwise.
the only’other thing i would ding him’on is since the recall election he hasn’t fought for stuff as hard, but i believe it is because he went into campaign mode for president then. it’s not any’political issue or’view so I didn’t include it as’part’of this discussion.
I swear, you're one of the most delusional people who's ever posted on this site.
Three words Walker needs to say, repeatedly: “Build the wall”. Failing that, he should be a non-starter.
Remember, compromising with bad policy is like adding a little sewage to your drinking water.
Walker is opposed to building the wall. Look it up. He has gone on the record several times saying he believes it is unnecessary.
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.