The GOP's Immigration Dilemma

The Hill ^ | 5/15/2002 | Dick Morris

[hchutch]

For its political survival, the Republican Party must court the Hispanic vote. Totally shut out among black voters and badly defeated among Hispanics, the GOP is having a hard time finding enough white voters to overcome the deficit. With blacks and Hispanics casting one vote in four, a Republican must win two-thirds of the white vote to have a shot at 51 percent in the average election.

And the situation will only get worse for the Republican Party. The Hispanic population, which swelled from 7 percent to 12 percent of the U.S. population in the past 10 years, is forecast to grow to 18 percent by the end of the decade. If they continue to vote Democrat, the GOP will run out of white people — and face death as a political party.

Only by taking the bold and dramatic step of providing amnesty to illegal Mexican immigrants can the GOP, at a stroke, become competitive among Hispanic voters. This legislation, the equivalent for Hispanics of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for blacks, holds the potential to reposition an entire slice of the electorate and move Hispanics to the Republican Party.

But, at the same time, the Republican Party needs to hang on to its base of angry white men who largely oppose immigration — and illegal immigration most of all. They are the base that insisted on English-only initiatives in the 1980s and 1990s, battled to cutoff aid to illegal aliens, and demanded a halt to bilingual education.

How are Republicans to reach out to Hispanics while appeasing their truculent base?

President Bush has already taken the lead in pulling the Republican Party back from the issue precipices on which it was dancing. By stopping Republicans from opposing bilingual education or affirmative action, and by demoting English-only initiatives to the bottom of the party’s agenda, he has moved mightily to strengthen GOP outreach to Hispanics.

But it is his amnesty proposal for illegal Mexican immigrants that holds the real hope for his party to avert demographic extinction.

The key to resolving the Republican dilemma of having to choose between outreach to Hispanics and alienating its Anglo political base is to condition amnesty with good citizenship requirements.

Republicans should offer conditional amnesty to Mexican illegal immigrants. Here’s the deal: If you want to stay in the United States, you must enroll in a good-citizen program. The immigrant has to agree to become functionally literate in English within two years, work for six of the next eight quarters and pay taxes to FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) for each of these quarters — no off-the-books work — and avoid arrest for 24 months.

At the end of the two-year period, those who meet the requirements would become citizens in good standing, eligible to vote and participate in civic life. Those who refuse to enroll or who fail the meet the requirements would face deportation. If the program works, it can be expanded to other categories of illegal immigrants.

Polling shows that most voters, even among the GOP base, are willing to forgive the illegality of their arrival if these Mexican immigrants show a willingness to earn their legal status in America. The compromise has the contractual opportunity/responsibility formula that sold so many of Clinton’s programs and that lies at the core of the highly successful welfare reform program. By asking something in return for giving something, the resulting transaction acquires a moral impetus that it sorely needs to win national support.

At the same time as the Republicans offer the olive branch to illegal Hispanic immigrants, they must use this year’s review of immigration statutes to close down immigration from nations that sponsor or harbor terrorists — including even such so-called allies as Saudi Arabia and Egypt. By closing one spigot as they open the other, Republicans can master the political hat trick of reaching out to Hispanics while appeasing their political base.

Otherwise, the GOP will go the way of the Liberal Party in Great Britain, to the political grave.

[7.63Broom]

I like your screen name.

[gubamyster]

Let’s be honest, they are here, they aren’t going away

They are here because the Gov't has failed to protect our borders. They aren't going away because law enforcement and the INS are not doing their jobs. They have all but given up. When law enforcement agencies take the Mexican ID card rather than turning illegals over to the INS for deportation no, "they aren't going away".

We need to enforce the laws on the books. Prosecute employers who hire illegals, deport illegals anytime they are caught, and protect our borders so they don't get in to start with.

I, like you, agree with immigration, but not with illegal immigration. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that each illegal takes $55K more from the system than they contribute over a lifetime. This is appalling. We need controlled, legal immigration with a means testing.

[7.63Broom]

You've got that right, my FReeper friend. And you touch on one of the sources of the problem. Businesses who hire illegals should be made to obey the law.

[hchutch]

Yeah, and we've got the left playing much nastier, too. Simple things like honesty, which you got from the likes of Hubert Humphrey and Daniel Patrick Moynihan no longer exist on the left. What is sad is that too many people, particularly on this issue, don't realize that, and don't adjust their thinking to take that into account.

I see us having a good chance if we rig up something like the proposal in this article. Reality has to intrude, and we can turn a few things on the Dems if we play our cards right. It's a chance, but we've got to take it. We can't try the Fortress America routine - it just won't work.

[FreedomFriend]

Most of the construction employers in the Atlanta area hire illegals. The same can be said for many other large cities across the country, as well as medium sized cities and small towns.

[hchutch]

What is wrong with pragmatically getting 90% of your principles?

[FreedomFriend]

What does it matter whether one of "our guys" is in office if the country continues to go down the toilet. That's right. It doesn't matter.

[FreedomFriend]

Following the law is the "Fortress America Routine". You sound like a defeatist, and how do you know that it won't work. Eisenhower instituted Operation Wetback to rid the country of illegals, and it worked.

[Kobyashi1942]

Then explain why Republicans got their clocks cleaned in the 1996, 1998, and 2000 elections in California.

What can I say, the Republicans ran far, far away from 187. Take a look at the loser that ran for Governor, Dan Lungren in 1998. That guy was strongly opposed to 187 and against ending Bi-lingual education. There is your explination. The anti-187 candidate lost in the biggest Gubinatorial land-slide in history of the State of California. Now it looks like you're the one who has to explain this phenomenon.

Sorry, but 187 didn't do us much good among the black population. They're still reliably Democratic.

Hey man, all I can tell you is that 187 passed with over 60 of the blacks voting for it. Curbing ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION WAS AND STILL IS POPULAR. The sad fact is that dopes in the Republican party are too busy selling out the nation to win over the Mexican vote.

[Shermy]

Amen.

I wished I saved it, but there was some months back a Wall Street Journal article (no surprise) saying that the housing "market" was benefitted by immigration because at the time the super-hype of the 80's was petering out, here came the immigrants to save the day! And screw 95% of other Americans.

Enough is enough.

[schu]

So what are you going to do, have the Police visit every vegetable field and construction site in California, ask for ID and deport those who don’t have it? Be serious, that’s a formula for Democratic/Socialist government from here to eternity. Will you submit to search and producing ID to verify your citizenship? Yes, it is/was wrong, stop it now, make those here meet some minimum requirements and get on with life. Chasing them back to Mexico will solve nothing.

[hchutch]

You still don't get it.

If our guy can push something through that can address this matter in a way that can satisfy all but the folks on either side of the fringes on this issue, we can clean up big time.

Big money for more enforcement on documentation, serious penalties for hiring illegals, and more Border patrol agents are things I'll say yes to in an instant. But merge those three items with a program similar to what Morris wants, and I've got all but the hard-core folks on either side of this issue. What is wrong with that?

[FreedomFriend]

It's still the best damn place there is and it always will be.

And you assume that this will always be a given? Why?

[FreedomFriend]

You're wrong. The way we're going now is a policy for continued socialist rule.

[hchutch]

That was before the days of CNN. These days we'd have all the horror stories.

Now, we can cook up more border patrol agents, more inspectors, and tougher penalties. That I'm all for. But I think it would be smarter to combine that with a setup like the one Morris proposes here. If only because it will be harder for the other side to disinform people about. It's not perfect, but I think it will work, and I think we can sell it to a lot more people.

[Black Agnes]

What's wrong is this. Give a mouse a cookie...sooner or later he'll want a glass of milk. We tried amnesty in '86. We were told it was absolutely the last darnit. Surprise, they're back for the glass of milk.

[FreedomFriend]

Don't you understand the multicultural context? Most are not assimilating.

Furthermore, you're advocating the alienation of the Conservative base. While rounding up immigrants may not easy, after the word is out, most will deport themselves. You're making the solution far more complex than it has to be.