Posted on 05/05/2008 8:28:51 PM PDT by pissant
Arizona Sen. John McCain has not given up on the idea of comprehensive immigration reform, despite criticism he received for trying to help push forward President Bush's plan to deal with our nation's immigration problems.
In fact, the GOP's presumed presidential candidate said Monday that as president he would again take up the effort in Washington with the goal of combining border security with programs for temporary foreign workers and establishing tamper proof identification so employees would know workers were legal.
It is a little surprising that McCain is willing to step back into the buzz saw of the immigration debate, especially since his more moderate position on the issue in the past has been very unpopular with members of his own party.
His Monday foray into the border battle was nevertheless welcome. It is an issue that needs to be debated by the presidential candidates in the upcoming election. It is an issue that is as important to the nation as the war in the Middle East, gas prices, civil liberties, health care and the economy.
In fact, immigration is a key part of any discussion on the economy because foreign workers, both legal and illegal, are a key component of the country's economic climate. The need for workers from outside the nation is likely to increase as the "bubble" of the baby boom generation passes into retirement and there are fewer available American workers to replace them.
We were pleased to see that McCain continues to believe, as we do, that immigration and border security are federal issues and not state issues. He said it was the federal government's failure to properly deal with comprehensive immigration reform that has encouraged some states - especially Arizona - to intrude into this federal sphere.
"It saddens me to see these conflicting approaches toward the issue of illegal immigration because we would not have this problem if the federal government had carried out its responsibilities," he said.
What he did not say was that there are some who really do not want comprehensive immigration reform and broader legal opportunities for foreign workers. The will do what they can to defeat federal efforts which they feel will "water down" actions against illegal immigration.
That is the hurdle that will have to be jumped if the next president, whoever it may be, wants the federal government to again assume its immigration responsibilities, as it should.
“I’d say they should not vote for him on the first ballot at the convention and elect another nominee on the second ballot.”
That’s my position - start a nomination floor fight. I believe Mr. McCain has only about 30% support of Republicans, as indicated by polling. That number could be wrong, but it’s enough to challenge McCain before the first ballot vote. He does not reflect certain important values in the republican platform. His nomination is not inevitable.
We should have enough conservatives at the convention to roll out the big cannons and blast away. All they need is backing and encouragement of the citizens - you and me.
>>The problem isn’t tracking legal immigrants<<
There certainly is a problem tracking those who initially hold legal visas (but after the overstay their visas the become illegals). After McCain pledged to secure the border first at CPAC, he did not vote for the Sessions amendment that would have established a visa exit tracking system.
>>Unemployment is at 5%. There are an estimated 8 million or so people out of work who want to work.<<
Let’s assume you are correct, although “unemployment” is presently rising and usually does not count those who have given up looking for work.
>>If all 12 million were thrown out, that would be 4 million more jobs open than there are people looking for work.<<
Not to worry. If deportation (including self-deportation) ever reduced the number of illegals by even 30%, the congressional stampede to bring in more guest workers and/or pass amnesty would cause such severe injuries to members of congress that multiple amulances would be needed at the capitol.
>>Certainly, with higher wages offered, we could get a significant number of people to move into these jobs.
But not all 12 million.<<
Agree.
>>As part of getting rid of illegals, we need to increase our ability to bring in controlled, TEMPORARY immigrant workers.<<
One problem is that we have no visa exit tracking system, so temporary worker programs, although a good idea in principle, add to the number of illegals, and this increases the pressure for another amnesty program. Another side-effect is that some legal temp workers bring in their families and have anchor babies, which have a great effect 20 years down the road.
Let’s see if McCain proposes totally new temp worker programs, even though IMO we have enough programs. I would guess that he will, but we’ll see.
>>But last month, when asked what comes next, he said several times that it was important to increase avenues for LEGAL immigration, including guest worker programs.<<
What is wrong with the temp worker programs we already have? If deportation creates real labor shortages, responsible temp worker programs are fine, but why do we need to “increase avenues for LEGAL immigration?”
Hunter is neither extreme nor protectionist.
80% of America, dems and GOPers, rejected ‘comprehensive’ immigration reform, and demanded ‘enforcement only’ instead. Nearly that many favor building the border fence. A large majority reject amnesty. IOTW, America agrees with Duncan Hunter, not John Mccain. And Hunter wrote the ‘enforcement only’ legislation, he wrote the Secure Fence Act, built the San Diego border fence, and he has rejected all calls for amnesty dating back to Reagan’s first term.
On trade, Hunter slams the US entry into the WTO because of our loss of sovereignty and the built in advantage it gave to nations that have a VAT. He despises the communists in China and would treat them as Reagan treated the USSR when it comes to trade. And he believes it is imperative that the US retain it’s manufacturing prowess, especially in the arena of defense. Hunter proposed to eliminate ALL taxes on US manufacturers who stay on American soil.
If that is extreme, then conservatism is extreme.
If you can vote for the anti-American Chuck Baldwin without feeling “yucky”, then you really have no place in the Republican Party.
Given what the Repube party has become, you are right. Turns out that I am the RINO, because conservatives are neither needed nor wanted in that party. Anti-American? I’d like for you to back that up.
I meant that the people opposed to illegal immigration don’t oppose a plan to track legal immigrants.
Of course not. The goal is to get them here, not to make sure they leave.
Let’s face it, we could employ all our citizens with no problem. This issue isn’t about jobs though folks. Don’t kid yourself. It’s about moving a massive amount of non-U.S. Citizens in here, that won’t gove a fig about our Constitution, and will vote for anything the politicoes want.
What happens if we do build a wall and it cuts off all illegal immigration? As you of you intimated, a guest worker program would be expanded to grant entrance. What most folks fail to realize, is that if zero come across the border illegaly, massive gues worker programs will allow in even more than have been coming here.
The goal is to get those people here and nothing is going to stop that from happening. The powers that be want them here, and they’re going to come here, to hell with the costs.
Our leaders are basically traitors. They do not serve at our will. They enforce their own.
He’s a Ron Paul isolationist who wants to surrender the world to al qaeda.
You can make all the excuses you want, but in the end, the American people have chosen only those who support amnesty for presidential contenders. That is what really counts.
Call it “excuses” if you want. However, they are facts.
Juan McAmnesty’s simply running to beat Filipe Calderon and become the new President of Mexico.
Ok, now go drink your daily dose of Koolaid.
McCain will grow this government even larger than Bush did. He will include a whole new Immigration branch that will handle all the new MEXICAN citizens. (Who will become Socialist Democrats by the way.)
But thank God that McCain has about as much chance as a cat at a Dogfight at winning this thing.
The fact is that nativist candidates like Hunter and Tancredo never received more than a few percent of the vote. The American people rejected their extremism.
No, the fact is the media, including the so-called conservative media, decided to spend 90% of their time covering Rudy McRomney. With the notable exceptions of Michael Reagan and Ann Coulter, the radio blabbers went along with this ruse as well, instead of defending conservatism and its champions.
To lump Hunter in with Tancredo - who really did speak of little more than illegal immigration - is showing a glaring ignorance of Hunter and his agenda. But I don’t hold it against you, since the media blackout was nearly perfect.
“He’s a Ron Paul isolationist who wants to surrender the world to al qaeda.”
source?
Don’t play dumb with me. You a CP member. You know damn well Balwin’s (as well as the rest of the nutjobs in the CP) position on the War on Terror
“Don’t play dumb with me. You a CP member. You know damn well Balwin’s (as well as the rest of the nutjobs in the CP) position on the War on Terror”
Your original charge was that Baldwin was anti-American. Back it up, if you can.
One more time: Baldwin is against fighting the War on Terror thus he is anti-American. Or are you saying that he is for fighting the WoT.
For a Mexican.
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.