Ted Cruz knocks Scott Walker on immigration

Washington Examiner ^ | 4/24/2015 | Drucker

[VinL]

Sen. Ted Cruz on Friday took a shot at rival presidential contender Scott Walker for comments the Wisconsin governor has made regarding immigration policy.

Cruz opposes comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for the estimated 11-12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. But the Texan is a big proponent of legal immigration and making adjustments to U.S. law that would facilitate more legal immigration. He criticized Walker for suggesting that he supported limiting legal immigration if it has a negative impact on the wages of American workers.

"There is considerable bipartisan agreement outside of Washington that we need to improve and streamline legal immigration so that we can remain a nation that welcomes and celebrates legal immigrants," Cruz said in an interview with the Washington Examiner during a brief campaign swing through Las Vegas.after cost estimates came in higher than anticipated.

I think it is a mistake for any politician to on the one hand embrace amnesty, embrace a pathway to citizenship for those who are here illegally, and on the other hand seek to restrict or punish legal immigrants," Cruz continued. "I am the son of an immigrant who came legally from Cuba. [President Ronald] Reagan referred to legal immigrants as Americans by choice and there is no stronger advocate of legal immigration in the U.S. Senate than I am."

"I think the right approach is to secure the border, follow the rule of law and embrace and improve legal immigration," Cruz said.

Walker has conceded a change of heart on immigration policy as he gears up to launch a 2016 presidential bid. The governor, 47, previously supported a pathway to legal status for illegal immigrants. Now he is opposed. Supporting a pathway to legalization or citizenship could be problematic for a Republican candidate seeking his party's White House nomination.

But in a recent interview with conservative talk show host Glenn Beck, Walker appeared to move farther to the right on immigration than even amnesty hawks like Cruz. Here's what Walker said, as reported by Breitbart. (read more)

[JJHLH1]

Excellent post Finny! Well stated and I couldn’t agree more. Legal immigration of talented individuals is one of the things that has helped make America great. We should embrace talented people who are willing to work hard, not shun them.

[Finny]

Hey!! You said what I wanted to say about your posts!!!

You are so very correct that legal immigration of skilled and talented folks fuels American prosperity and I would even say superiority, and it's so good to see you state the case so well. :^)

[stephenjohnbanker]

” In all candor, I must say I really think the trolls don’t have a chance. Here’s the reason: Cruz is dropping substance left and right. This is the sign of a rare but powerful politician.”

The trolls have a chance, as long as they ignore reality, or pretend to. This thread is full of fools and GOPe shills, who are backing a proven liar (Walker), and trying to cast doubt on Cruz. They make me sick. As for the terminally obtuse FReepers, all they need to do is go to RedState, and read “ 12 Reasons why Conservatives Shouldn’t Back Walker.” If 5 minutes is too much to ask, then screw em!

[alstewartfan]

It is rare that I disagree with Cruz, but I think that we are overwhelmed by illegal AND legal immigration. Now, I wonder, is Ted talking about improving the legal system only AFTER we have border security? You are talking many years until that is accomplished. Bob

[ConservingFreedom]

He gives LOTS of figures

The AEI study on H-1B was riddled with flaws: see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3271551/posts?page=207#207 and following.

[ConservingFreedom]

H-1B ping. Let me know if you're not on this list and want to be added (or are and want to be removed).

[ConservingFreedom]

fyi

[Oldhunk]

I would feel a lot better about Scott Walker if he changed his position on a path to legalization for illegals already here.

Seems kind of illogical. Stop or reduce legal immmigration, but legalize illegals.

[JJHLH1]

If anybody thinks reducing legal immigration is a good idea, just look at Japan. They have a well educated, hard-working, talented workforce. Their economy should be booming. Unfortunately for them they have a low birthrate and a very strict legal immigration policy. As a result their economy is a basket case, and has been so for fully two decades. Let’s not follow their example of what doesn’t work.

[ConservingFreedom]

Unfortunately for them they have a low birthrate

So let's lower the barriers to birth, such as a per-child income tax exemption that hasn't kept up with inflation ever, and comically underrepresents the cost of raising a child.

[reasonisfaith]

Not on board with Walker as “a proven liar.”

At this point it’s simple. Cruz is the best, Walker a distant second.

[ConservingFreedom]

I would feel a lot better about Scott Walker if he changed his position on a path to legalization for illegals already here.

He has, as he stated in the Glenn Beck interview - odd that Cruz doesn't seem to acknowledge that. (Whether you trust Walker's change of heart is another story.)

[reasonisfaith]

Many trolls on here are establishment trolls. But the establishment is leftist in its essence.

Again, the establishment appears to prefer Walker over Cruz, and the possible reasons for this are limited to a few.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Not on board with Walker as “a proven liar.”

Then you need to research him more.

By the way, in a span of 10 days this month, Walker met privately in 2 different states (closed to the public and media) with the Chamber of Commerce leaders. The COC is the #1 proponent of amnesty, and illegal immigration.

[MinorityRepublican]

Japan should allow 100,000 Asian immigrants a year. As long as their children are required to go to Japanese schools, they should be able to blend in.

[kabar]

Walker wanted to give all 11 million illegals here citizenship as recently as 2013. That means they can vote, get social security and other benefits.

If you legalize them and give them work permits and SSNs, they get benefits. They just can't vote. Cruz also wants to increase legal immigration. Legal immigrants can vote and they vote more than two to one Democrat.

Cruz says he is against amnesty, but he defines amnesty as including a path to citizenship. The fact is that legalization of their status allowing them to work and live here is amnesty. Citizenship is just the cherry on top. And when you reward something, you get more of it.

Walker now says send them back to their home country and let them apply to enter there. He has changed his mind or as Obama and the Dems say, he has evolved on the issue.

[kabar]

Freedom. Self reliance. Individualism. American exceptionalism, the Constitution, Shining City on the Hill, brother.

That doesn't resonate among most immigrants and minorities. They favor Big Government and more benefits. It is in their self-interest to vote for the Dems. Phyllis Schlafly laid this all out with documentation, graphs, etc. in her study, How Mass (Legal) Immigration Dooms a Conservative Republican Party If you are truly interested in the facts, you should read it.

Here are some factoids about immigrants in America:

In 2010, 23 percent of immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) lived in poverty, compared to 13.5 percent of natives and their children. Immigrants and their children accounted for one-fourth of all persons in poverty.

The children of immigrants account for one-third of all children in poverty.

In 2010, 36 percent of immigrant-headed households used at least one major welfare program (primarily food assistance and Medicaid) compared to 23 percent of native households.

n 2010, 29 percent of immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) lacked health insurance, compared to 13.8 percent of natives and their children.

New immigrants and their U.S.-born children account for two-thirds of the increase in the uninsured since 2000.

here are 10.4 million students from immigrant households in public schools, accounting for one in five public school students. Of these students, 78 percent speak a language other than English at home.

Overall, one in four public school students now speaks a language other than English at home.

Many immigrants make significant progress the longer they live in the country. However, on average even immigrants who have lived in the United States for 20 years have not come close to closing the gap with natives.

The poverty rate of adult immigrants who have lived in the United States for 20 years is 50 percent higher than that of adult natives.

The share of adult immigrants who have lived in the United States for 20 years who lack health insurance is twice that of adult natives.

Well the answer is they don’t have any ideas, they don’t believe in anything, and they aren’t going to do anything outside of advancing the government agenda, which is exactly what they have been doing. But I’m sure if we elect a bunch of republicans in 2016 they will finally get around to advancing even one item of the conservative agenda...NOT!

So what's your point? Since both parties are essentially the same, what should real conservatives do and whom should they support? You want to keep, at least, the current level of legal immigration which means importing hundreds of thousands of future Dem voters annually. You want to hasten the demise of the country. Strange and incongruous.

[zzeeman]

The fact is that legalization of their status allowing them to work and live here is amnesty. Citizenship is just the cherry on top.

We all have to remember that this "second class citizen" status won't last for long. With the way our courts are now, the lawsuits will soon follow to say that keeping this large block of people as "second class citizen" is unconstitutional and must be remedied at once by granting them full citizenship. Heck, they probably already have their briefs written and ready to go.

[chris37]

“So what’s your point? Since both parties are essentially the same, what should real conservatives do and whom should they support?”

I don’t know, you tell me, your answer is as good as mine. There doesn’t seem to be much of a selection for conservatives to support in this country. Might well be that there is no solution.

And no, I don’t want to hasten the demise of the country, but the demise of the country might well occur regardless of what any of us want or don’t want.

We’ve tried voting them out, and it really doesn’t seem like an Article V convention is catching fire, and even if it did, it seems like trying to pass gun control laws for criminals to follow, so after that what’s left?

If the people of America, natural born or otherwise, don’t want to be free, then they are not going to be.

If I had to try and put my finger on the root of the problem, I’d say that many generations ago free people decided that they didn’t need to focus on fighting for freedom any longer, because they already had it, and they didn’t really bother teaching it to their children, or teaching how hard it is to get and keep, and what happened was, over a period of generations, free people created a nation of complete jack asses that know nothing at all of value or importance.

And I’m not really sure how to correct that or if it can be corrected. Maybe the best that can be hoped for is that some future free nation not follow in our footsteps. And if there is a future free nation, they should know that the left will be there right from the start trying to destroy it from within, because the blueprint for such has been written.

[zzeeman]

If I had to try and put my finger on the root of the problem, I’d say that many generations ago free people decided that they didn’t need to focus on fighting for freedom any longer, because they already had it, and they didn’t really bother teaching it to their children, or teaching how hard it is to get and keep, and what happened was, over a period of generations, free people created a nation of complete jack asses that know nothing at all of value or importance.

When mulling over thoughts like you've written above, I've often wondered if we are exhibiting the classic "victims of our own success!" The core of Liberty and Natural Rights that our Nation was founded upon, coupled with free market capitalism, led to such great success. Disposable income and leisure time soared for the vast majority of our citizenry over time. The "poor" were no longer really poor.

Pop culture and other entertainment industries cropped up and provided all the distractions necessary. Cheap and plentiful consumer goods also provided a ready target for an inordinately large amount of focus.

A large majority of the population no longer felt it necessary to keep our eyes and ears on Washington, DC. All was running along swimmingly and the perception developed that there was no longer any reason to keep our eyes and ears on the levers and switches.... And, here we are.