Posted on 04/10/2006 2:03:58 PM PDT by Jack Black
Republicans face a growing disaster on immigration. Right now the GOP is sailing on a dangerous course where they are increasingly turning off two pillars of their new majority. The first pillar is the talk-radio portion of the Republican base led by Rush Limbaugh (and the many who have followed in his wake) that provide a tremendous amount of energy to the conservative movement. The second pillar the GOP is endangering is the Hispanic community, the single largest growing demographic in American politics. In 2004, President Bush increased his share of the Hispanic vote to around 40% nationally. Had John Kerry been able win the same percentage of the Hispanic vote as Al Gore in 2000, he would have won the presidency.
ADVERTISEMENT
The problem for Republicans is they are split and not speaking with one voice. The result is that they are managing to turn off both of these vital constituencies. Beltway pundits who casually throw aside the concern of the conservative base on this issue make a mistake and underestimate voter intensity on the illegal immigration problem. For a conservative base already demoralized by a Republican-led Congress incapable of cutting spending and frustrated by a war that is either portrayed as floundering (or actually is floundering), abdication of responsibility on the illegal immigration mess may be the last straw that compels many conservatives to sit on their hands this November.
If you think Republicans are picking up support in the Hispanic community for how they are dealing with immigration, you'd be wrong. The Hispanic community is focusing on the severely PR-challenged House bill which has sparked enormous public demonstrations -- political energy that will not be helpful for Republicans this fall. It doesn't matter that an overwhelmingly majority of House Republicans voted to take the felon language out of the Sensenbrenner bill but were defeated by Democrats who cynically (but shrewdly) voted to keep the language intact. Rep. Peter King (news, bio, voting record) tried to explain on FOX News Sunday that the House bill is being distorted and humanitarians aiding illegals wouldn't be prosecuted, but it is too late. The House bill is killing Republicans in the Hispanic community.
So right now Republicans have managed to create a political environment on immigration that further demoralizes their base while at the same time angers the largest growing electoral demographic critical to a long-term GOP majority. Is it any wonder Senator Schumer implored Harry Reid to scuttle the Senate "compromise"? The last thing the Democrats want, from a political standpoint, is to resolve the immigration issue.
Even though Schumer and many Democrats don't want an immigration bill, Republicans should be happy the Senate compromise went down in flames. If something like the Senate bill were to become law it would be a disaster for Republicans because the conservative base will revolt if a Republican President and Congress attempts a rerun of the Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty of 20 years ago. When you strip it all down, that is essentially what the Senate compromise McCain and Kennedy were crowing about last week would be.
It would be counterproductive to suggest there are easy answers to our broken immigration system. There aren't. Any solution that expects to pass, and to have the backing of the country, means there will have to be compromise on all sides. If the need for good public policy can't get the Republicans to come together and get something done, then maybe fear of losing their majorities in Congress might compel some real leadership.
Unlike the Social Security stalemate, a compromise is possible, but it needs to be a compromise between McCain and Kyl, not McCain and Kennedy. Republican leaders should try and get as many Democrats on board as possible, but with Republicans in control of the House, Senate and the White House; Republicans have an obligation to lead irrespective of whether the Democrats wish to cooperate.
With an understanding going in that each side is going to have to give up something they deem non-negotiable, here is a rough outline around which a deal could be formed:
- it needs to be made clear (particularly to the Hispanic community) that the problem is illegal immigration not legal immigration.
-the flow of illegal immigrants has to be stopped. This is not about hiring x thousand more border agents or throwing more money at the problem. First, this means building a fence and securing the border. And second, fines and prison for employers and business owners that hire illegals. Law enforcement needs to be focused at the border and then within the country on employers, not the workers. The fact that you will not stop the illegal flow 100% misses the point and ignores the 90%-99% you will stop.
-the number of legal immigration slots needs to dramatically be increased. (Again, it has to be emphasized over and over that the problem is with illegal immigration, not legal immigration.)
-there needs to be some pathway to citizenship provided for the 11 million illegals here right now.
The right is going to cry amnesty at any process that puts illegals on a pathway to citizenship while still being able to live in the U.S. The left is going to balk at a real fence and shutting down the border. But liberals who say they are for enforcement and securing the border are going to have a hard time opposing the only real way to secure the border. And the only way conservatives will stomach what is effectively a 2nd amnesty is if they know a fence will go up and the illegal flow will grind to a halt.
With the President's leadership a compromise along these lines is possible. However, right now Bush and the GOP Congress appear rudderless; hoping gerrymandered House districts and not quite enough Republican Senate seats in play will keep them in power. Unfortunately for conservatives, it looks like they would rather play those odds than lead and grow their majority.
That bill doesn't require complete deportation. And in any case, it was introduced in 2005 and has gone nowhere. Odd for a bill capable of garnering 51 votes.
Their can't be a complete wall, who with any geographic sense would espouse that? Doesn't mean the non-walled places can't be monitored.
Actually, there can be. Or certainly better than the 700 miles covered by the House bill. The danger without a wall is that it is dependent upon enforcement in the future, and that really can't be guaranteed. There are ways to pretty much guarantee enforcement, but the house bill doesn't do that.
No, but the GOP acted like Conservatives when they were in the minority, so maybe it's time for a lesson in humility - to remind them who can put them in the majority, and who can take it away.
i dont disagree with that
"That's nuts. Who says we have to have "mass" deportations? A8-10,000 a month like europe and canada is doing. No tears there from the tax paying public who've been robbed by these leeches, either."
Let's just say 10k/month. 12 Million. 100 years. Sounds like a form of amnesty to me.
But, seriously. You honestly think the MSM would let the GOP get away with deportations like that? You don't think every story on the evening news wouldn't be some tear jerking special on the poor immigrants being deported? Sure, a lot of folks would think it's great, but a majority?
The polls are on our side.
Do you think the Democrats have a preferable plan?
The GOP is totally CLUELESS when trying to read the political winds.
If someone would run on that platform, they'd get elected and then you'd have the votes. Politicians are spineless cowards and they all deserve to be voted out. Screw the dems. Screw the traitorous GOP.
The reporter who wrote this sounds like he is enjoying the Republican suffering a little too much.
"The second pillar the GOP is endangering is the Hispanic community,"
No.
The pathway starts at the end of the line.
Response: No. The GOP is killing the GOP!
ok. Your right 100,000 a month. 10 years. How about that?
And by the end of the line, it should be the end of the line.
The end of the line is in MEXICO and other foreign countries. The end of the line is not living in America with a job and a foot in the door waiting to become a citizen. The latter is called jumping to the front of the line.
There are millions of people who want to come to the United States. All these illegal aliens in the United States need to get behind them, not cut in front of them.
Amnesty is a loaded word. Let's be more specific.
Works for me. But now you're talking mass deportations. Care to guess how long the politicians would put up with the negative media?
Seriously, I do believe we need to do something. I support the wall as an obvious first step. But we do have to do something about the 12 million already here and I don't think deportations would be acceptable. Sure, lots of polls indicate support but I can remember when the polls showed Bush at 70%.
On this particular issue the President shoulders much of the blame. Had the President been doing his job and enforcing the immigration laws already on the books, then the Republicans in Congress probably wouldn't have got involved, and even if they had gotten involved in the immigration issue, it would have United the Party and conservatives around supporting the President and enforcing the law. Unfortunately, the President has chosen to follow a perilous path which in no uncertain terms will alter the future of this nation in fundamental ways. James Madison once asked, What more is government than a reflection of human nature? Thinking about that quote, one quickly realizes the simple truth that the government will tend to behave no differently than the people which make up the nation as a whole. If you accept this premise, then any change in the culture of the people also will change the behavior of the government. From this we can conclude that if an amnesty and citizenship is granted to the illegal aliens in this country, the future character of the government too will begin to reflect the added character of the new people added to the nation. Considering the way in which many illegals have disrespected the Constitutional laws and customs of the US( i.e. failure to assimilate), as can be seen in most of the recent pro-illegal alien rallies, and also realizing that their behavior could potentially become the future behavior of the government; we are left with a bleak out look on the future of conservative principles in this nation. Do we want the character of those who break our just laws to be reflected in our government? Is that a change that the people of this nation are ready and willing to accept? If so then so be it, but that choice should and does rightfully belong to the PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES and no other.
What deportation? Do you "deport" people who illegally enter a place where they do not belong? These illegals are not suppose to be here.
Let's them go back to their nation of origin on their own. If they are arrested for some minor offense, then send those back. But there is no need to gather all 12-20 million of them. Dry up the jobs, enforce the laws, they will go home one way or another.
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.