Posted on 04/10/2015 1:40:37 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Ever since Scott Walker began engaging on the national stage, he’s been dogged by questions about his policies on immigration. The Wisconsin governor admits that his position has changed from a few years ago, a change he attributes to having more opportunity to study the issue now that the cycle of elections in Wisconsin has finally played all the way out. Still, Walker has had some trouble defining the issue in a way that makes him stand out from the field.
Did he succeed last night? In an interview with Sean Hannity, Walker said that immigration policy should have as its first principle the protection and improvement of American wages, and not just the crisis management of today (via Daniel Halper):
HANNITY: … You took time to go to the border. What did you learn there, what insight did you gain from that experience?
WALKER: I went to Texas to the border with Governor Greg Abbott, who offered. I’m going to go back to Arizona, New Mexico, and maybe even California with local and state officials there as well. But in Texas in particular, Greg Abbott showed me, with the men and women on the ground from the local level to the state level to even some of the fine men and women who work for the federal government, and they showed that we’re just being overrun.
This is an issue of safety, of security, national security. It’s ultimately an issue of sovereignty. If the United States was being attacked on one of our water ports on the east or west coast, we’d be sending in our military forces. And yet we’re facing some of the same challenges with international criminal organizations — the cartels that are trafficking not only drugs, but weapons and humans, and we need to step up and be aggressive about it. That means securing the border with infrastructure, with technology, with personnel, and the federal government’s got to lead the way on it. We can’t expect the border states to do this alone; the federal government needs to step up and act on it. You can’t be talking about anything else until you do that.
Once you do that, then you can talk about enforcing the laws by using an effective e-verify system for all employers, one that works for small businesses, farmers, and ranchers, and making sure that any legal immigration, no amnesty, any legal immigration system we go forward with is one that ultimately has to protect American workers and make sure that American wages are going up. That’s the way we prosper for every hard working American in this country.
NRO’s Rich Lowry signals his approval of the new focus:
Scott Walker has taken some hits on immigration, including here at NR. But he did well on Hannity last night when he was asked about his trip to the border. He enunciated a position on immigration that is very sound, and expressed a concern about workers and wages that almost no other prominent Republican (besides Jeff Sessions) ever does.
Usually, economic arguments about immigration get tied to pro-business positions of providing low-cost labor for “jobs Americans won’t do.” This turns that argument on its head, arguing instead that businesses should pay the prevailing wage in American markets and that immigration policy should be calculated broadly not to impact that calculus. It’s a pretty nuanced argument intended to attract support among populists on both sides of the fence, perhaps most especially among blue-collar workers. If nothing else, it gives Walker a fairly unique position in the GOP field, and a way to provide a coherent argument to which he can return when the topic arises.
Lowry expressed hope that other GOP contenders will follow Walker’s lead, and it’s not bad advice. Barack Obama wants to make American wages the focus of his economic policy the next two years, and Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly try to do the same thing in her new campaign. This will force both to link their own policies to their open-borders preferences and explain the contradiction to the blue-collar workers that will be most impacted by them.
>>Walker hasn’t walked back the gist of his previous pro-amnesty positions with any substance at all.<<
I don’t think you’re going to find a GOP candidate who declares no amnesty in the sense that a lot of people here mean it. Not Cruz, nor Walker, nor Perry, nor anyone else. Some people here now illegally will eventually be given green cards and some will even eventually be able to become citizens, under any law that has a realistic possibility of passing, no matter how tight the restrictions are.
I do think Walker is slowly changing his viewpoint though. Wisconsin isn’t exactly a hotbed of illegal laborers. They’re here, sure, but it’s not generally a huge issue across the state, so it’s logical that he wasn’t all that concerned about it from a Governor’s perspective. Running for President, however, is a different matter entirely and I think he’s listening to people more directly affected in other states.
That said, his wage argument is going to put Democrats in a bind right now because of Obama’s immigration stance and how it conflicts with their living wage agenda. It’s also a good start toward strictly limiting the number of guest workers initially, especially if coupled with laws that encourage people to rejoin the domestic labor force.
Walker’s a politician in the good sense. He figures out what can realistically be accomplished in the short term, but keeps his eye on the long term goals simultaneously. As a result, he makes consistent progress toward the longer term goals by taking what he can get short term and not shooting himself in the foot by insisting on the perfect package immediately.
He’s still STRUGGLING. It is VERY SIMPLE:
1) No jobs for Illegals - employers get thrown in jail
2) No goodies for Illegals - meaning no welfare, Obamacare...
3) No education for Illegals - meaning no K-12 (screw the courts) and no enrollment in colleges - at least colleges that participate in student loans (i.e., 99.746% of them)
4) A BIG WALL to put an end to border runners
5) And finally - Respecting LEGAL HISPANICS for all of the good things they’ve done for this country - including the awesome people that I work with.
>>He’s an Establishment guy, however....<<
For an “Establishment guy” he’s getting a lot done in WI that the establishment never dreamed possible. If he manages to become President because he hasn’t totally alienated the GOPe, I would view that as further confirmation of his political skills.
I will say this. Walker goes after the lifeblood of the Left, i.e., their taxpayer funding, and he does it relentlessly. Planned Parenthood clinics are closing in WI for that reason primarily. Union membership in the public sector has plummeted.
And his proposal to cut the UW system loose to operate on their own will cut the full time state employee count about in half! Doing so could cut the link between the state and the university system so that the university system would be more objectively evaluated by all concerned. As long as the state runs the universities, everyone is “Rah, rah, that’s our school,” whereas out on their own people might start asking where the real value lies. Hint: It’s not in gender studies.
And yet he manages to maintain his image with the GOPe. I think that’s a plus, not a minus. Frankly, I thought he do poorly when he went national. I’ve been very surprised at how well he’s done thus far.
Start with your #5, then with the same attitude figure out a fair way to handle those here illegally today, and I think #1 through #3 would quickly become public policy.
It’s that middle step that causes all the consternation. As I said, start with your #5 and hold that attitude through the middle step and you’ll likely get what you want in the end.
And, done right, we might not even need that wall. If there’s no reason to come here illegally, why bother?
Ever.
Because only politicians who take that position will ever see my vote, advocacy or money.
It's my bottom line.
But his illegal immigration (still to this point, despite his empty misdirection words) would kill any hope of a conservative majority in the future.
He would overwhelm our system with Leftist Latin voters.
Someone bring back Jesus so we can satisfy some of the purists among us.
I watched that interview and I can ‘t decide if I think Walker’s had an epiphany or not. Why should I care when I can just vote for Ted Cruz who never wavers in his positions.
What is it with you WI guys wanting to give the country away?
Well it’s better than the statement he made in an interview about not needing all of that if we just had a better immigration policy.
I don’t know where he has been living the past 8 years or so but I’m just a housewife in WI and even I knew that the border issues were not just about illegal immigrants. The border also has issues with drug running, human slavery, gun running as well as terrorists that wish to do us harm. I wish I had been interviewing him. I would have asked him about that.
Was Walker naive about the entire immigration and border issues before he decided to run for president? He was making statements and supporting pathways to citizenship since his first years as County Executive of Milw. Cty. And he has been asked about it more than once during interviews the past several years. I would also think that as Governor he at least read some newspapers? We should think about that. I know these are questions I have asked myself.
I don’t believe Scott Walker is a liar. I think he is a man who wants to win and is walking (no pun intended) a fine line trying to straddle both sides of the fence. He is either being ill advised or being handled. In the meantime he makes himself look very squishy and makes people distrust him.I do believe that Walker is very much committed to the Republican party and won’t stray far from them. Somewhere between Bush and Cruz.
Trust is a tricky thing. It should not just be granted to someone. That’s called blind trust. We all know what can happen with that. It must be earned and you don’t earn it by flip flopping all over the place on major issues and saying one thing to one group and another to some other group or in private. It’s hard enough to trust any politician as it is. I’d feel more confident about Walker if he had been upfront from the beginning about his policies and beliefs and let the chips fall where they may.
If he needed to “study up” on issues as big and important as these perhaps he wasn’t ready to even think about running for POTUS yet. You would hope that a person who wanted to run for the highest office in the land has strong beliefs. To forward the people’s agenda and not their own. To be formulating one’s beliefs while practically on the campaign trail makes one wonder what is motivating this candidate.
We shouldn’t have to make up excuses for our candidate or make them into some kind of folk hero with an ace up their sleeves. They are who they are and we need to look at them honestly to take measure of the man. Or woman.
When people criticize a candidate that is not bashing them. A candidate may be a very good person but that alone doesn’t make them a good leader. And we certainly need one of the strongest and most committed candidate for 2016. One that has a very clear idea of what they believe and is not afraid to come right out and say it. We won’t get perfection. They are all human and have their strengths and weaknesses. But dang it, stand up and say “This is who I am and this is what I believe and if you believe the same follow me!”.
Yes, Walker stood up to the unions. But he didn’t do so alone and since he has had aspirations of running for POTUS he hasn’t stood firmly for much else since then. We need to look at these men and women in a much broader and honest way. What have they done in the past? What have they said then and now? Have they been consistent? Do they sound truthful? What are their motivations?
Are we looking at them as super heroes who are going to solve all of our problems for us or are we looking for a human being, imperfect but one who can lead us with strong conviction and help us to solve our own problems? One who will bend to the people’s will and not follow where their own ego leads?
The chance to be the most powerful man or woman in the country is quite the brass ring isn’t it? It can’t be easy not to lose focus on your responsibility to the American people and the will to win at whatever cost. It is also very difficult for us to not become emotionally connected to a particular candidate whom we favor. But we can’t be blind about it.
Excellent post.
Walker has done well for Wisconsin, but has made me very nervous about what he would do as President regarding the border and our immigration laws and the illegal aliens and their employers who ignore them.
His previous statements and his close relationship with Preibus and Ryan, both cheap labor importers, does not make me any more likely to believe his White House road conversion to the rule of law.
Even his more recent statements aren’t clear, he’s still talking about a future immigration system as if we don’t have laws in place now that are being ignored, by the illegal aliens, the employers and the government.
We should not change any laws to benefit those breaking them. We should not allow the government new laws if they won’t enforce the current ones.
“We should not change any laws to benefit those breaking them. We should not allow the government new laws if they won’t enforce the current ones.”
Well said.
Vote for who you like. I will.
Either Scott or Ted Cruz needs to leave the race. We can’t be dividing the Conservative vote.
I think all conservatives are shaken and suspicious now.
The last election was a party for the Republicans, and a new dawn for us.
Or so we thought.
Within days, the sleazy and seedy sell outs started materializing - it seemed impossible.
Would they really do that? Brazen and callous doublecrosses?
Yes. The smarmy chamelons who are the Republican “leaders” pulled the football away yet again. Its all a con. They just need the votes so they get the money. Ideals and principles be damned.
Thats why we are leery of Walker. He has their odor, in a way Cruz does not.
And yet there is this hope - he seems like a good guy, has a compelling story - the self made governor, valiantly fighting the masters of thuggery.
But can we trust him....
Or is he telling us what we want to hear. Followed by, “ you misunderstood what I said...” After the election.
That scam.
I don’t know. I guess at this point I can tell you who it will be anybody BUT: Bush or Rubio. Both want to be the first Mexican President.
Bush will wear his wife like a badge.
This point in history....we’re at a node. Would a Walker see the abject danger? If so, how come he didnt see it before? Too busy stomping the municipal workers union to notice?
Might be an excuse in his case. I’ve never seen anything like the government rebellion he endured, and the bigoted, vicious recall.
I like Cruz. When he speaks, he finishes my thoughts. Watch Ronald reagan in the famous speech at the ‘64 convention: same fire.
But Walker fought the war. And won.
If we could belive him, he’s the more electable of the two, conventional wisdom. But....there’s the flipping...the flopping...uhnhuh. Fool me twice...
We have a long time for this to play out. We have two horses who can win anything. Right now, its time to understand both of them...and decide.
Guess I’m a gambler. If i had to pick now, it would be Cruz. He knows what the reality is. But can he win?
Politicians always say the right stuff, and then they get elected and do whatever their financial over seerers want. I like the idea of making immigration policy something that is good for Americans, and not just business.
He’ll be indoctrinated by the global Chamber of Commerce whose first goal will be amnesty, open borders, cheap labor and rescinding our Constitutional right of national sovereignty through trade pacts. Multi-nationals do not like sovereignty as it gets in their way.
When corporations actually served the USA instead of every country that will make them more profits I was a corporationist. Now I view corporationists as the opposite of conservative. They have no corporate citizenship.
Well when Walker finally announces and has to start taking fire like Cruz and Paul we will see how he shakes out. Remember when Rick Perry was the guy?
I’m happy to see all these guys in the race as they will hopefully beat up on Jebbie and get rid of him early in the debates.
Except Walker was out there taking all the fire before Cruz announced, just after that PAC speech that bumped him to the top.
Cruz announced first so the MSM would start picking on him instead of Walker because he knew that was the way to get campaign donations. "Oh, they are going after the only real conservative again Ted Cruz , Just like with Palin four years ago. Honey lets mortgage the house to show him that we support him".
Walker has already learned some lessons from all the negative attention he got. It will be fun to watch.
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.
