With any politician it's what they do that counts, not what they say, and on that count Perry wins hands down.
Posted on 10/01/2011 11:40:25 AM PDT by smoothsailing
Timothy Bladel
October 1, 2011
Do any of the candidates running for the Republican nomination other than Gov. Rick Perry remember the 2000 election cycle? I am not going as far to say that the Perry camp has decided to make a calculated stand on the in-state tuition issue for the sake of the general election, but Republicans should not dismiss the importance of the Hispanics’ vote now and in the future.
It is widely known among those who live on border states that hard line positions on immigration can end a political career. As the white electorate shrinks over time, the GOP is going to have to find a way to gain a capacious share of the Hispanics’ vote. I’ve heard the chatter from the establishment, who claims that Hispanics care about the same issue most other Americans care about. This is true, but can anybody really claim they have an accurate count regarding how many Hispanics have family members who happen to be in the country illegally?
For this reason, I have to ask if it is wise for the other candidates to demagogue the in-state tuition issue?
I am going to set aside the infamous “heartless comment” for a second, and focus on the policy. Perry has come under fire for his unwillingness to budge from his position on immigration, the main one being the 2001 law he signed in Texas that allows children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates at colleges and universities. Gov. Mitt Romney has made it the center point to attack Perry on in an attempt to paint it as a liberal stance in line with the thinking of President Obama, and as not a conservative position. Not only is this attack canard, it can have negative consequences on any candidate that has to run in the general election.
Since the 2010 election is often brought up as the reason the Republican candidates no longer have to walk soft on immigration, it is important to understand it has some fundamental flaws. I already noted that GOP is going to need to keep pace with Democrats in the growing Hispanic population. The suggested number to maintain is said to be anywhere from 40 to 45 percent of Hispanic votes. Looking to the midterm for a reference point is somewhat flawed because the midterm electorates often trend toward being the white, older, and college educated members. Democrats have not shown the ability to bring out their traditional constituents in off year cycles. Presidential elections tend to be a more diverse electorate, especially in 2008. We cannot forget about the fact that Hispanic voters tend to live in specific states, making their influence on the electoral map that much more significant.
This brings us to the premise, has Perry positioned himself to siphon Hispanic votes away from Obama? Let’s look at a few interesting facts.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, twelve states grant Texas style in-state college tuition to illegal immigrants stating “typically condition eligibility on attendance and graduation from a state high school and acceptable college admission applications.” Here’s the list of states in alphabetic order: California, Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin. Three of the four states that have adopted this law are border states, making them directly affected by illegal immigration.
Perry has maintained that “if you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they've been brought there by no fault of their own, I don't think you have a heart," and even though this has hurt him with his core base of conservatives, one cannot help but think this has to be attractive to Hispanics voters; a constituency that Republicans are going to need to siphon if they want any hope of winning the presidency now and in the future.
Perry’s defense against the exaggerated attacks from Gov. Romney and Rep. Michelle Bachmann has been to bring up the history of immigration in the United States; how can this not resonate strongly with Hispanics. He's used this same defense since the law passed, and by sticking to this defense, he can rightly claim that he is not like his closest rival Gov. Romney. Anything Romney says about this issue will make it that much harder for him to find any issue that resonates strongly with Hispanics, who I already stated is a key voting demographic.
When pushed on the federal D.R.E.A.M. Act, the Perry camp had this to say “Gov. Perry opposes amnesty and the federal D.R.E.A.M. Act. Washington must first secure the border before we can have any rational discussion about immigration reform. Once that is accomplished, then we can have a conversation about how to address immigration."
One has to wonder how this side step of the issue on the federal level will affect how Hispanic voters will see Perry; there is no way I can say with certainty. I know if I were a member of this community, I would think he has to move toward a stronger stance to make it through the primary process, and he will work on immigration reform once borders are closed and illegal immigration is down to a trickle like he has said. I do not see any reason that Perry cannot be seen as strong on immigration and passionate about giving children who are here at no fault of their own a chance at a better life. Perry has at least one Republican establishment voice that has come to his defense on this issue.
In an email to the National Journal, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush concurs with Gov. Perry, claiming in-state tuition for children of some illegal immigrants is a "fair policy." According to a statement from the National Journal, not only is Bush a supporter of this law, Floridian Sen. Marco Rubio is also a supporter of the law. This has to come as a surprise to many conservative and Tea Party members.
Listen to what Jeb Bush declares “If Bush and Rubio represent the future of the Republican Party, which is inevitably intertwined with winning favor in the fast-growing Hispanic community, then what does it mean when a rock-ribbed conservative like Perry can’t take a moderate stance on immigration? Perhaps no other issue bedevils the Republican Party as much.” Bush and several Hispanic Republicans have explicitly attempted to warn Republican candidates against making the in-state tuition policy a wedge issue, but this has not stopped Gov. Romney from possibly alienating the fastest growing portion of the electorate.
This has become a valuable weapon against the Texas governor in the primaries, but Perry has taken this issue and made it his own, and in my opinion, becoming the only person that can win an election against President Obama; and the argument has not even touched on Romney’s other general election problem.
I take it you are reffering to the story about hispanics classifing themselves as white that came out earlier in the week. I think it was those of Cuban decent, and those that are from NM and AZ. They would be correct with that classification as both groups are mostly of European decent, with none to very little Mestizo blood. Check out the early history of the American South West. It will enlighten you a great deal.
and bigoted.
Liberals are utter morons.
There is no such thing as a Latino race. This is a liberal invention to Balkanize the United States.
The US doesn’t have a Latino problem, because most Latinos are law-abiding citizens.
We have an illegal problem mainly from Mexico and a few Central American countries.
By the way, the so-called Latino-illegal immigration liberal tune would change in a heart beat if the US all of a sudden decided to import millions from Africa or Asia to be guest workers in agriculture and other crappy jobs.
You think the so-called Latinos would be happy about that?
No, they would become the most vicious racists and fascists you could imagine.
By the way, never listen to a liberal journalist explain why illegals are good for the GOP.
I don’t support in-state tuition for children of illegals, but that’s where the 10th amendment, federalism and states rights come into play.
Perry should come out and state, if elected President, he would not support comprehensive immigration reform or Harry Reid’s “Dream Act”.
Oh wait. Perry already has said that.
On Hannity’s show and in several other venues.
Any Perry comments from hereonin are self-serving----designed to fool the voters and advance Perry's unbridled lust for presidential power.
With power-crazed politicians like Perry----it's not what they say that counts----it's what they do.
Rotflol...good photo and says it all...now show one with Perry as a Globalist and I’ll be one happy camper for the day!...hahahahha
No more Rhino’s!!!!!!
You don’t have to welcome me. My family has been in NM since the 1590’s. They came with the Onate expedition. There was an unfortunate 10 year span from 1680 to 1690 when they had to flee to what is now El Paso due to the Pueblo revolt.
The GOP nominee will win no matter who that is.
Until then it's all just hot air, whether from Bush, Rubio, Perry, or the kid at McDonald's who keeps trying to sell me some kind of tropical fruit-flavored glop.
lol.
WHat a funny headline
Ofcourse NOT. He pushed this to keep the FEDS OUT of TEXAS.
THAT is what is important to Perry he is adamantly against ANY FEDERAL violation of States Rights. PERIOD.
Maybe if some of you ACTUALLY LISTENED to HIM rather than get your info from Perry haters you will see he is the TRUE Conservative.
He wants the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO SHRINK. To bad the Perry haters prefer maybe not an expanded Fed but just a “reworked” FED.
He has kept the EPA, and DOEDU at bay. The Elitist and establishment FEAR PERRY. And they Should.
“...remember the 2000 election cycle?”
Remember 2010? Proper analysis of the political landscape requires staying on top of things. Out of work Americans want jobs and education for themselves, not for illegals who shouldn’t be here. People who are paying higher taxes and higher insurance premiums while making to with less and less, don’t want to hear about how unkind they are when their cash is going to criminals.
“...hard line positions on immigration can end a political career”
Oh, ...you mean like Governor Martinez of New Mexico?
This soft on illegal immigration argument was bogus in 2000, and it is bogus now.
I’m a little tired of the whole identity politics as usual. Republicans must elect a candidate who panders to (insert favorite minority here) otherwise the Dems will win. Lets try something different. How about we have a candidate who puts country, the Constitution and rule of law ahead of “groups” of people we think we “need” to get elected.
Cindie
Hmm. I see downthread the Perryac commanders have alerted the troops. Prepare for incoming.
Here's a clue. Perry must have some lucrative deals with Mexico.
PERRY AT THE 2001 BORDER SUMMIT---salivating over the thought of "congressional funding" for border commerce
PERRY'S BORDER SPEECH EXCERPT "Seventy percent of all US-Mexico truck traffic goes to, or through, the Lone Star state. Fifteen of our twenty-seven border crossings with Mexico are located in Texas. Fifty-four percent of all U.S.-Mexico trade crosses just between Brownsville and Laredo.
This year the Texas legislature appropriated approximately $1 billion more in transportation funding. But more can be done. With Texas serving as the Gateway to Mexico, it is time that we receive congressional funding that reflects the instrumental role our state plays as a port of entry.
With a Texan (GWB) in the White House, I believe there is no greater opportunity to end the funding discrimination that crippled Texas infrastructure under the previous administration. Good infrastructure is essential to the free flow of commerce."
========================================
PERRY'S BORDER SUMMIT SPEECH---EXCERPT "Seventy percent of all US-Mexico truck traffic goes to, or through, the Lone Star state. Fifteen of our twenty-seven border crossings with Mexico are located in Texas. Fifty-four percent of all U.S.-Mexico trade crosses just between Brownsville and Laredo. This year the Texas legislature appropriated approximately $1 billion more in transportation funding. But more can be done.
"With Texas serving as the Gateway to Mexico, it is time that we receive congressional funding that reflects the instrumental role our state plays as a port of entry. With a Texan (GWB) in the White House, I believe there is no greater opportunity to end the funding discrimination that crippled Texas infrastructure under the previous administration. Good infrastructure is essential to the free flow of commerce."
CIRCA 2001 BORDER SUMMIT--PERRY W/ MEXICO'S THEN-PRES VICENTE FOX
Pres Fox thanks Gov Perry for giving illegal migrant workers access to Texas universities via in-state tuition. At that time----at a "border summit"---- Perry also advanced a “bi-national health insurance” program that would cover both US and Mexican residents along the border....including the savage Zeta gangs setting up drug cartels in Dallas. Perry praised a “unified,” trans-national health care program. and was ready, willing and eager to pour US dollars into illegals violating US borders.....including the savage Zetas setting up its drug cartel in Dallas, and those on the border organizing against the US.
Perry's "border summit" speech. LINK http://governor.state.tx.us/news/speech/10688/
==============================================
God only knows what this Mexico suckup would do if he had presidential power.
Bwhaha haha haha!!!!
I think Perry was wrong to take this tack in the primary.
However, I do understand why Texas passed the in state tuition law.
It was for the general welfare of Texans.
I do think the law would NOT hurt Perry in a general election.
It would probably aid him.
This is a matter of getting folks educated and working.
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.