Posted on 03/29/2015 11:11:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
After some setbacks over the past several weeks, top aides to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker tell Breitbart News that he’s toughening up his immigration position as he learns more about the issue.
“He’s for border security first, enforce the laws on the books, fix legal immigration system with national interest in mind and then deal with those here,” Walker spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski said in an email.
Kukowski’s comments to Breitbart News come after a trip Walker took on Friday to the border with Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott.
A lot depends on what the governor means by a: “legal immigration system with national interest in mind.” Still, this could be a step toward Walker remaking his image on immigration in the manner of Senate Judiciary Committee subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest chairman Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL).
The question becomes: What does Walker think is a legal immigration system that serves the national interest? While he hasn’t laid that out yet, there’s a massive opportunity for either success—or failure—depending on where he comes down on this matter.
“He looks forward to further detailing his ideas on securing the border and enforcing the laws,” Kukowski added. “Yes, at the minimum, there needs to be penalties put in place. In addition to securing our borders, the federal government must enforce our laws, penalize those who break the law including paying back taxes, and implement a universal E-Verify system so employers are hiring legal employees.”
Where Walker comes down on the immigration system could make or break his candidacy...
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Walker-Cruz 2016
You are misinformed.
Scott Walker and Ted Cruz basically hold the same position on securing and defending the border, first.
Walker said that for citizenship you go back to your country of origin and get in line.
Walker said the next president needs to then have a discussion with Congress on setting up a way for others to apply for legal status (that is not citizenship).
I believe Cruz lines up similarly.
TED CRUZ ON IMMIGRATION
1. End Obama’s illegal amnesty via Congress’ checks & balances.
2. Defund amnesty; and refuse any nominees until rescinded.
3. No path to citizenship for 1.65 million illegals in Texas
4. Give police more power to ask about immigration status
5. Boots on the ground, plus a wall
6. Triple the size of the Border Patrol
7. Strengthen border security and increase enforcement.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Ted_Cruz_Immigration.htm
The facts are that Walker supports citizenship and Cruz opposes it.
That is a massive, defining difference.
Daily Herald—The biggest split is about what to do with those 11 million or whatever it is. Can you envision a world where, with the right penalties and waiting periods and meet the requirements, where those people could get citizenship?
WALKER: Sure. Yeah. I mean, I think it makes sense.
If you say what you mean and mean what you say why do you need to clarify anything. It ain’t rocket science and americans are not too stupid to understand plain english.
Upon reflection, a large number of americans are indeed challenged to understand plain english. So clarify away.
We are soooo screwed..........
[WALKER: Sure. Yeah. I mean, I think it makes sense.]
Walker thought citizenship made sense until he was called on it.
Now “he’s toughening up his immigration position as he learns more about the issue.”
He also supported the McCain/Kennedy immigration bill.
That is misleading. At most, Walker has suggested a visit for family before becoming citizens. He has never suggested that illegals go home to wait in line before returning to the US and becoming citizens.
Walker has repeatedly said that he’d legalize all illegals here and eventually make them citizens. He’s also said that he’d make it so easy for anyone from Mexico or any other country in the world to come here legally if they want to that they’d not have any incentive to cross the border illegally. That would make securing the border nearly a moot point.
The reality is that there never was a basis for Anchor Babies. The law on the books was to make slaves circa 1865 citizens, and the law should have sunset-ed.
If we did e-verify and real crushing penalties for hiring illegals, no free education, no drivers license, no social benefits, just like Mexico does, there would be a traffic jam going south at the border. They would go home, and millions of Americans instantly would have job opennings.
“Walker denied he discussed any options for citizenship during the meeting in New Hampshire.
“I made it clear that for me, if somebody wants to be a citizen, they need to go back to their country of origin, get in line, no preferential treatment,” Walker said. “In terms of what to do beyond that, again, that’s something we got to work with Congress on.”
https://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/28/walker-denies-reversing-position-illegal-immigrati/
Securing the border is enough for at least two years.
Yes he did: in his now-famous TV interview. He has since, two years later, acknowledged what he said and now says that his views have changed.
He shouldn’t have to be steered, he should go the right way on principle.
All below are quotes from an article followed by the link to the transcript and the VIDEO.
“Yes, Gov. Walker supported path to citizenship:”
BAIER: In 2013, you said you supported a path to citizenship for people living here illegally, but recently you’ve —
WALKER: Actually, I’m glad you asked about that, because the Wausau newspaper erroneously quoted me on that. They listed a video on their website that actually showed that the person who asked the question said that, not me, and ever since then I’ve had to deal with reports over and over again.
BAIER: So that’s wrong?
WALKER: That’s wrong. It’s not what I said. I have said I believe we need a legal immigration system. I have said repeatedly I oppose amnesty. I think we’re a nation of immigrants, but we’re also a nation of laws. We should have a legal way for people to come into this country either for work or for citizenship, just like we have for generations. Part of that deal is we need to make sure we have a border that’s secure, not just for immigration reasons, but as I mentioned, for national security.
I’m “the person who asked the question.” Walker is wrong. We have the video to prove it.
But the bit about endorsing a path to citizenship? Yeah, that definitely happened.
In the interest of transparency, here’s the full transcript of the 2013 exchange, which you can also watch in the video above. Emphasis added in a couple of places:
But that’s the “touch base”-type solution that Pence and other GOPe pro-amnesty pols have suggested. Yes, they need to go visit family, and no they don’t immediately become citizens, but in no way is he advocating that they be made to move back home—and then wait in line.
He’s always been a pro-amnesty weasel on the subject, but adopting the visit-family fig leaf is new to his repertoire now that he’s getting some pressure on his position.
It’s my thinking, make it hard as hell for an undocumented immigrant to live here. An undocumented immigrant opens themselves to deportation when they break a law. They are a lawbreaker if they receive wages without paying taxes. They are lawbreakers if they drive a car without a license or insurance. Instead of paying a fine, the cost of self-deportation is the fine. If they are unwilling to go through the documentation process, self-deportation is the key.
Walker Revokes In-state Tuition For Undocumented Students Attending Univ And Colleges In Wisconsin "..........More than 200 protestors were outside the company with signs calling Walker, "You dirty rat" and "Shame, shame." ........................" [It wasn't long before 100,000 activists were surrounding the capital and sleeping inside.]
An activist DA and Prosecutor have also been waging (and this is ongoing) a 4 year secret John Doe investigation on Walker and Conservatives in Wisconsin: Part 188 of 188 in the series Wisconsin's Secret War. "U.S. Supreme Court could soon decide whether to take John Doe Case"
So I will cut him some slack on this.
It's that "deal" part that we're not thrilled with Scotty boy.
Naps buddy, I keep looking for what Walker's position is for those here ILLEGALLY, but what does "deal with those here" really mean? I realize no candidate is going to say deport the trash, but they need say more than to say "deal with" them. Wouldn't you say?
Won’t listen to voters: unelectable
Listens to voters: unelectable
How does one win a game like that. Be born with preconceived ideas exactly matching the time of your campaign?
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.