Obama Can’t Keep Skirting Immigration Issue
Recently, I heard a conservative radio talk show host suggest that Obama was pursuing one liberal idea after another. Next up, he said: immigration reform.
First, Obama isn’t pursuing immigration reform. It’s pursuing him. The president spent his first year in office running from the issue. He dedicated just 37 words in his State of the Union address to immigration. It wasn’t until tens of thousands of people marched on Washington last weekend that Obama got up the nerve to climb out from underneath his desk. Even now, Obama won’t say what principles should guide an overhaul of immigration laws. All he will say is that he supports the legislative framework set out by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsay Graham (R-SC), who will soon introduce a comprehensive immigration reform bill around which the next immigration debate will be centered. As proactive as Obama has been in other matters, when it comes to immigration, he is strictly reacting to events going on around him.
Second, despite the hype and the demagoguery, immigration reform is as much a conservative idea as it is a liberal one.
Let’s start in 1986, when Republican President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act, an amnesty bill co-authored by Republican Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming.
Conversely, Democratic President Bill Clinton was so afraid of being seen as weak on border security that he signed some of the most restrictive immigration laws the country had seen in half a century. Those provisions denied welfare benefits to legal immigrants, fortified the U.S.-Mexico border through Operations Gatekeeper, Safeguard, and Hold the Line, and made it easier for the government to deport illegal immigrants.
Meanwhile, in California, in 1994, voters passed Proposition 187, an insidious ballot initiative that sought to withhold benefits to punish illegal immigrants and their children for the fact that Californians had grown addicted to cheap illegal immigrant labor. While Gov. Pete Wilson, a Republican, used the measure to resurrect his reelection campaign, some of the loudest opponents were also Republicans. They included Silicon Valley entrepreneur Ron Unz, syndicated columnist Linda Chavez, and Empower America co-directors Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett. And when supporters argued, just as they have since Ben Franklin wailed on German immigrants in the 1700s, that immigrants were ruining America, it was another conservative — William Kristol, now publisher of the Weekly Standard — who countered: “Immigrants don’t corrupt America. America corrupts immigrants.”
Immigration reform is truely an issue that sucks, big time. Leftists would like to import new voters to replace all of you unreliable Americans just as the Left did in Europe. But European elites had another problem – the below-replacement level birthrate of Europeans threatened the Leftist European Union model. They needed not only votes but workers, taxpayers. Of course, what they really got was an Islamic Fifth Column.
While it is certainly an excellent idea to prohibit Muslim immigration, the American situation vis-a-vis Hispanic immigrants is far less clear-cut re: the potential dangers to America’s future. While the European example is a clear case of national & cultural suicide, the American situation is far more ambiguous.
Let’s just invite everyone to become a legal citizen no matter what country of origin they are from! Who needs laws anyhow? America is drowning in debt, jobs are still scarce and now Americans are being forced to buy 0bamacare after jamming it down our throats and if cap-n-trade passes too it will make everything go UP in price, but, hey…
JOIN IN THE FUN! Tell your friends and their friends to hurry on over while the gettin’ is good! We’ve got enough housing (get a Fan/Fred loan and we can have a whole new housing bubble again heh), water, energy, gas, hospitals, doctors, jobs and plenty of monopoly money being printed up the kazoo for EVERYONE!
What could possibly go wrong?????? Peso anyone? Anyone?
P.S. I don’t see many black or white people in that ‘march on Washington’ photo. That looks raaacist! /sarc
P.P.S. Where did the ‘nativists’ come from before they were ‘nativists’? If you guessed all humans including ‘natives’ came from Africa, you win a prize!
*sigh*
More bigotted propaganda
from the Chris Matthews of Illegal (in English, that means it’s a crime) Immigrants.
There is one major cause for greater optimism about America’s future than say, Europe’s…and that’s demographics. And the big reason our demographic future looks brighter/younger and more dynamic than Europe’s can be summed up in one word: Immigration. This has always been the driver of America’s growth. We do have to get it right though – and manage it – the situation as it stands is not sustainable. For one thing, the American vision was always “melting pot” vs “cultural mosaic” and we’re losing sight of that…there is no presumption any more that immigrants will assimilate culturally and linguistically. That’s a big problem. There are school districts in this country that have to offer classes in like 15 different languages.
I think the author is also correct in that the way the Dems…and Obama chief among them..have handled this issue so far leaves them very vulnerable to a big wedge being driven into their “social justice” armor. This is an opportunity for the Republicans (or fantasy..a new independant movement), assuming we can keep “nativist instincts” in check.
Reuben, you have it all wrong. Backwards, even.
Reagan’s 1986 immigration reform was well-intentioned, but proved to be a disaster. It didn’t stop the influx of illegal aliens. That’s why we don’t want a similar kind of “comprehensive” reform that provides amnesty. We tried it. America was generous, and we were taken advantage of.
There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that the taxpayers of California or any other state should be required to subsidize those who make a voluntary choice to enter the United States illegally. None. Proposition 187 was a legitimate expression of the will of the people of California that there’s no free lunch.
There may be corporate interests on the “right” that favor immigration reform with amnesty, but that reflects the desire to be free riders – to obtain cheap labor at the expense of the taxpayers. Adam Smith, the apostle of the free market, noted that businessmen would, if permitted, combine against the public in restraint of trade. The business support for amnesty is just an example of that.
The best thing we can do is to remove ALL incentive to enter the country illegally: no citizenship for children born to illegals, no public benefits at all (including school for the kids or health care), and, if caught, permanent deportation without any hope of ever reentering. Do that, and give those currently here illegally a reasonable time (say 90 – 180 days) to settle their affairs and leave without prejudice to a right to reapply to return legally. But, without leaving, NO reentry, EVER.
Document who is here; get rid of ones with a criminal record; secure the border, this is not 1700, 1879, or even 1914; then mostly hungry for a new life with a promise of a better future…today, that is still true, but there are many who are coming in who want to destroy America’s future; big difference!
Harold Hill Obama; how is that “hope and change” working out for: you?
You are wrong, coming soon on the agenda: “can you believe it, can you believe it”…followed by the “draft”; as in you are in the army now! See when the government suddenly gets rid of “do not ask, do not tell”; that is how they tell you they do not want virtually every conscripted (drafted) showing up 4F: gay deferment! And no college deferments this time either: boys and girls; yes boys and girls…if that does not get them pregnant, nothing will…need all those new babies to pay for Obama care! See how integrated this presidents policies are!
Watch out all Beck is right, The other hand is in play with China taking over.
Mr. Navarette:
“I don’t care whether or not you support comprehensive immigration reform. But, if you’re going to cast the debate in terms of liberals and conservatives, at least tell the story right”
As far it goes, this is true…but it’s only as far as YOU go.
Peculiar how your sense of history’s grand sweep peters out in the mid-1980′s, when the kernel of this problem goes back to 1965 and the blatantly discriminatory Immigration and Nationality Act:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
The money guote is from that hotbed of right-wingnuttery, the Boston Globe:
“A Boston Globe article attributed Barack Obama’s win in the 2008 U.S. Presidential election to a marked reduction over the preceding decades in the percentage of whites in the American electorate, attributing this demographic change to the Act.[3] The article quoted Simon Rosenberg, president and founder of the New Democrat Network, as having said that the Act is “the most important piece of legislation that no one’s ever heard of,” and that it “set America on a very different demographic course than the previous 300 years.”"
Just this year it has come to light that the Labour Government in the UK essentially did the exact same thing,(albeit in a telescoped time scale), and for the exact same reasons that LBJ and his pack of Democrat liars so long ago did.
But yes, I will allow that any upcoming Immigration Reform debate will be “gut-check” time for the GOP’s politicians…and conservatives.
Which is exactly why the Alleged Hawaiian,(who has some as yet unanswered questions about his own citizenship status),is doing it.
My advice to the GOP nomenklatura…remember George W. Bush. It was his “call-it-anything-but-an-amnesty” Immigration initiative that first caused the base to rebuke him.
And note John McCain, jumping up and down and waving his arms so desperately trying to stay “relevant”, instead of quietly retiring to go play golf somewhere.
Yeah, remember the 86 amnesty, that immigration reform was suppose to control the borders too, and didn’t, because controlling borders offended the hispanics and the Napa Valley grape growers. Way I see it, the democrats, Nancy and the grape growers, have till November to ram through “immigration reform.” Problem is, the democrat’s health care reform is waking up a sleeping giant. The democrats are not going to like the monster–already there are cries from the democrats reminiscent of the German Riechstag Fire. The night of the living dead is coming up. If I were to look for an historical analogy, it’s 1859, and the republicans will soon be on a roll at the ballot box.
Miltong Friedman had it right “You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state.” Study after study has shown that hispanics on average – even after 3 generations – do not make enough to pay for the benefits they receive. Greatly increasing the population of dependents on the state is the last thing we need, especially now that we are on the brink of default.
This past week on GRITtv we interviewed Robert Lovato of New American Media and Seth Wessler of Color Lines about immigration: reform, the march, and the fate of the movement in the wake of healthcare. Just wanted to pass it on to an interested party! Enjoy!
http://www.grittv.org/2010/03/26/gearing-up-for-battle-on-immigration-reform/
Embed Available on site
2. Humanity did not originate in Africa; it originated in the Middle East, in what is now Iraq. That is why Mesopotamia was the world’s first civilization, and Egypt came after it. The proof is in the genetics- Africans and Asians are more closely related to each other than either of them are to European or Middle Eastern peoples, but the European and Middle Eastern peoples are not so closely related to each other.
12. myth buster,
It’s all hypothesis based on mitochondrial dna. I just like throwing it out there that humans didn’t start as ‘natives’ historically and that we all migrated from ‘some other place’ to where we are now.
(Plus, I like saying I’m African when people ask my ethnicity he-he).
Oh and that hypothesis is also based on skull findings as well:
Skulls confirm we’re all out of Africa
13. Mitochondrial DNA that disagrees with Y-chromosomal DNA in terms of most recent common ancestor. That is proof-positive of a bottleneck.
Again Ruben, you deliberately go the revisionist route when summarizing both the ’86 & ’94 outcomes. No surprise for anyone familiar with your CNN & PJ Media charades.
Alan Simpson did a yeomans job with his attempt – and his most important partner – although not on the legislative side – was the late Barbara Jordan. They both concluded the same thing – which flies in the face of todays bogus claims on both the left and right – either for shamnesty or ‘comprehensive’ reform.
First – immigration does hurt american workers – always has and always will – it’s simple common sense and all the prostlysing to the contrary – whether its from Academia or think tanks like Cato or worse on the left OR right – it’s all the same self-interested lobbying; When low skill workers have to compete with already existing ‘nativist’ low skill workers – employers always win – and by extension – Americans loose. Hense the loving references to ‘worker unicorns’ – the magical beasts of burden who come here as blank slates happy to work for less.
Folks like Victor David Hanson have been shedding light on these facts for almost as long as the failures of prop 187 have been ravaging Cali.
Second – the linchpin of Simpsons solition WAS A NATIONAL ID CARD – and this was before the many biometrics we have today with DNA and all. What we have had was what he and Barb Jordan told us we would get – massive ID fraud – fraud that has leached into our federal and state funding by way of warping our true population demographics.
[here in Az the courts demands regarding english learner has eaten a conservative estimate of 1/3 of all k-12 funds for almost 15 years!]
Open Boarder apologists like Ruben don’t like the current hand they are stuck with. Selling the need to import mostly unskilled hispanics for all the same ‘humanitarian’ excuses masqurading as public policy.
At least Bush was honestly acting on his beliefs – born from his experiences as Tex Gov – a notoriously right to work state. Obama is a shamless opportunist – from of all places Chicago. He hasn’t just poisoned the well with Health Care – he blew it up.
Lindsy Grammah can stick his ass alone out in the wind to hang all he wants – nobody cares. ITS A DEAD BEAST RUBEN. Forgetiboutit.
What we want as far as immigration ‘path to citizenship’ are the best and brightest that people like Marc Malone has talked about in his articles – not teenagers with no education migrating from El Salvador.
The post 9/11 world turned this issue from an economic debate into a National Security AND Economic issue – and all the satire about ‘latino terroritst’ won’t alter that a bit.
Latino’s can go all telemundo drama queen all they want – it won’t change anything. Crying racism crying anything in the face of this ecomony – for the next TEN YEARS – and the financial loses the American middle class has suffered? Get Real.
Rubens delusional. Latino’s believe IMMIGRATION IS THEIR ISSUE – well they are polo loco – What has happened since Pete Wilson and 187 in Cali isn’t the MODLE – IT’S THE WARNING.
We will remain what we have been since implementing rational immigration resratints -YES QUOTA’S – in the early 20th century; the desired destination for entreprenurial genuius. The racial crap is just background noise. It’s about skills and jobs. The people we want are the ones who will be CREATING THEM, not STEALING THEM.
High unemployment as far into the future as anyone can see; Americans looking at ten years worth of make up on their 401k & housing value savings; And the War on Terror – these trump the provincial yearnings of speical interest group latino’s like those Ruben stumps for.
All the name calling and mud slinging won’t change those facts one bit.
15. myth buster,
Do you have info on that? I’d be curious to study up!
Here’s a new discovery of third hominin group out of Africa:
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/03/24/2240236.aspx
Fascinating stuff!
Also, the theory about bottlenecks was in the skulls link from 14. that I shared.
Of course, the science is never completely settled with each new discovery.
We live in Orwellian times:
Hispanic groups pursue their agenda based almost entirely on racial affinity. That is to say, they want people who look and speak like them to ne able to break our laws with impunity help themselves to what’s here for no other reason than ethnicity.
Meanwhile, anyone insisting on the rule of law without regard to race or ethnicity is reflecivive accused of being a racist.
The mainstream media types love this skewed view of things and rarely deviate from it.
Oddly the same is true of the Affirmative Action debate: if you DON’t believe applicants should be judged on skin color, you will be widely vilified as a Jim Crow Neanderthal.
Interesting times, and only getting more so.
By the way, every time any Democrat wants to make racism accusations, ask them to explain Obama’s quaint locution from the campaign: “typical white person.” That is the very essence of a racist statement.
Are these estimates of amnesty 10 million? 20 million? I think higher. Much higher.
I don’t care whether or not you support comprehensive immigration reform. But, if you’re going to cast the debate in terms of liberals and conservatives, at least tell the story right
Sounds good. Tell me that story again. No wait. Tell it to the families of victims murdered by illegal immigrants who have been caught and never deported.
Crack the popcorn and let’s see you tell those families “the story right”.
Amnesty should be out of the question. Quess who’s political party would benefit from millions of new, eager voters.
We should build a real barrier to illegal entry (that’s infrastructure spending I can live with), issue the biometric card to everyone(hard to stomach but essential) and make everyone here illegally come out of the shadows. If they have gainful employment with no criminal past they should be given a worker’s visa, pay taxes and be given a 10 year path to citizenship. The key is to stop illegal entry.
We’ve created/allowed this situation to develop. We must now be pragmatic and find a fix without rewarding those who are breaking the law.
Hispanic groups pursue their agenda based almost entirely on racial affinity.
which group do you share affinity with Mike? if it walks like a duck.
Zanne: these people are undocumented? was it 200 or 20 thousand Tea Partiers at the national mall last weekend? depends on who counts them. i’m going to take a page from our illustrious leader… suppose a man, ok lets make it a frog…depends on whose narrative we speak of.
with unemployment at an all time high even for white people, do you really think there are jobs Americans won’t take? the chickens have come home to roost, young people are going to have to learn the value of hard work and starting at the bottom and working their way to the top. so much for their inherent sense of entitlement.
Republicans want immigration reform to give cheap labor to their corporate masters. Democrats want immigration reform for votes. The Middle Class ends up getting the shaft – neither Republicans nor Democrats are interested in helping the Middle Class.
Jennifer, I totally disagree. It’s not about cheap labor. Immigration done correctly brings in great people with new ideas. Gary Becker at the Booth School had a great idea. There is a demand for labor, especially highly skilled labor-like mathematicians and engineers. There is a supply. that means there is a price.
Hence, we ought to consider charging for immigration. Different labor inputs require different prices.
Enforce the immigration laws that we have. Ignore Navarrette’s narrative’s on the subject. He thinks he is an authority on immigration because he is Latino. Now, that makes sense. Next subject.
Nice try, but Americans don’t owe these people citizenship. When immigration ‘reform’ rears its head it is about politicians’ need to be seen doing something; it is not about something that needs to be done. These people did not come here expecting citizenship; they thought it might be a possibility down the road, but not a sure thing. Along comes a couple of demagogic and ignorant politicians and it becomes a need that needs to be addressed even if it harms a larger part of the population. Legalization will do great harm to the country and encourage millions more to come here. These first generation people do not like this country and they actually resent Americans even in our own country. I know this for a fact. And these clowns in Washington want to legalize twenty million of them?
Im for deporting Ruben Navarrette Jr.
John, I admire your implicit accusation of racism as it proves my point about the Left’s preferred tactic.
The answer to you question is that I share affinity with people who believe in the rule of law. Without regard to race. It is illegal to sneak across the border even if you happen to be of a “preferred” racial group.
Is that too complicated for you to understand?