No use blaming the Democrats when the backlash comes against this ill-conceived, ill advised Administration “guest worker” program. Whatever credit Bush is going to get from his corporate supporters and the US Chamber of Commerce will be lost in an avalanche of criticism from the center-right.
In short, Republicans who vote for this mess are going to be put on notice: Make sure you have something lined up in the way of another job after November:
President Bush and a group of senators yesterday reached general agreement on an immigration bill that includes a pathway to citizenship for many illegal aliens.(HT: Malkin)
But left out of the closed-door White House meeting were senators who oppose a path to citizenship. The meeting even snubbed two men who had been considered allies of Mr. Bush on immigration—Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican and chairman of the immigration subcommittee, and Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican.Mr. Bush in brief remarks to the press said there was agreement to get “a bill that does not grant automatic amnesty to people, but a bill that says, somebody who is working here on a legal basis has the right to get in line to become a citizen.” But senators, speaking afterward, said Mr. Bush was far more specific in the meeting.
“There was a pretty good consensus that what we have put into the Hagel-Martinez proposal here is the right way to go,” said Sen. Mel Martinez, Florida Republican. “I think he was very clear [on] pathway to citizenship, so long as it goes to the back of the line, and he even opened the door here for something we’ve haggled back and forth on, that you can shrink the time for people to become citizens by simply enlarging the number of green cards.”
It is not an overstatement to say that this is a complete electoral disaster for Republicans. Not only are there sure to be howls of rage from the Republican base, but every single poll on immigration shows that the great political center for which any candidate must depend to put them over the top on election day is dead set against the President’s program.
Americans are a normally fair minded people as a group. And when they see special treatment being doled out to people who break the law, it sticks in their craw and makes them more likely to take out their feelings on the closest available target; in this case, Republican lawmakers.
In an irony of ironies, the President is going to have to rely on Democrats to get this bill through both Houses of Congress. I’m sure the Democrats will be more than willing to oblige the President since they correctly see the immigration issue as a winner. They can criticize the President from the right by attacking his border security measures while continuing to assault from the left by saying that Republicans are racists who want to oppress Hispanics.
Such arguments won’t impress conservatives but they will resonate with their own base as well as peel middle of the road voters away from Republican candidates. This is a recipe for defeat in November and if it occurs, the President and the open borders Republicans will only have themselves to blame.
There’s a chance that opposition can still coalesce in the House and defeat this bill when it comes to a vote. But those Republicans are going to have to be certain that we conservatives have their backs. I suggest sending an email to your Representative urging him to vote against this proposal and making it clear that how he or she votes will be a determining factor in your decision about who to vote for (or whether or not you intend to vote at all) this coming November.
UPDATE
Both Tano in the comments and PJ Media who linked to this piece sound a little skeptical about my analysis. Let’s go to the polls!
From Rasmussen Survey of 4/7/06:
Forty-six percent (46%) of Americans said that they prefer the candidate with the harder line on illegal aliens while 38% opt for the candidate who wants to expand legal opportunities for foreign workers to find jobs.
However, those who say the immigration issue is very important in determining their vote prefer the pro-enforcement candidate by a much larger margin, 67% to 23%. This suggests that the short-term political advantage on the immigration issue lies with those who want a tougher enforcement policy.
Fifty percent (50%) of Americans say the immigration issue is very important. Another 32% say it is somewhat important.
An earlier survey found that two-thirds of Americans believe it doesn’t make sense to debate new immigration laws until we can first control our borders and enforce existing laws. That same survey found that 40% of Americans favor “forcibly” requiring all 11 million illegal immigrants to leave the United States.
Sixty-seven percent of those who think immigration is an important issue favor a pro-enforcement (anti-amnesty) candidate. And 82% of Americans think the immigration issue either “very important” or “somewhat important.”
Disaster? What disaster?
Oh btw – I’m not one of them but that same poll shows an astonishing 40% of Americans favor “forcibly” requiring all 11 million illegal immigrants to leave the United States.
In short, a politician would have to try pretty hard to get to the right of the American people on this issue. Congratulations to the President and the open borders Republicans who support him in Congress. Not only are we going to be stuck with a nightmare of an immigration law, but you’re making it very difficult for the dwindling number of people who support you to become motivated enought to get up off the couch on election day and go vote for you.
10:26 am
Rick: I agree, even though it probably won’t work (stubborness is a character flaw) we need to contact the White House. Following is the email I sent to President Bush earlier today.
Mr. President
The White House
Dear President Bush:
I applaud your heroic stance after the 9/11 attacks and for your many other accomplishments from tax reduction to Supreme Court appointments.
With all due respect sir, I believe that you and the Republican leadership are wrong on the illegal immigration issue. Allowing illegal immigrants to break the laws they dislike solely based on their color and national origin violates our Constitution and civil rights laws going back to the Civil War. Further, not enforcing illegal immigration and hiring laws erodes respect for the rule of law in America. Great harm is being done to our country.
As a practical matter, the Dept. of Homeland Security is not ready to handle tens of millions of immigrants, and won’t be for years. Please support the House bill, H.R. 4437 for enforcement only and lets take a look at other issues of immigration in 4 or 5 years after DHS is ready.
Mr. President, the majority of the American people support border security and oppose blanket amnesty and unearned citizenship. Let’s make American citizenship worth something and require citizens to be loyal to America first, to be productive and benefit our country, and to speak English so they can be assimilated.
Please Mr. President, put America and its security ahead of Mexico and its needs.
Sincerely,
(Name & Address here)
ljamesl@aol.com
http://linknzona.blogspot.com
11:39 am
Rick:
Thanks again for the fine article. I quoted some of it at http://linknzona.blogspot.com Please stop by and see what you think.
11:47 am
Well President Bush hasn’t seen the bottom of his popularity yet. By coming out yesterday with his “liberal” illegal immigrant appeasment stance – he basically put a nail in the coffin of the Republican Party. He has shit on the 33% base that have stood by him through thick and thin and now will lose many of them too. The Democrats weren’t going to vote for the Repubs anyway, now he and his little band of faux Republicans will likely lose the House and quite possibly the Senate. It’s one thing to ignore your critics on the left, but quite another to ignore your base. I’m an Independent conservative that has always supported Bush – but now I’m not taking anything off the table come November.
12:42 pm
I think you are wrong about a few things here.
First off, your claim that the great American middle is against this is nonsense. Seems pretty clear that you are trying to persuade people of something by claiming they believe it already – typical basic propaganda move. Most Americans fully understand the need for these people to be regularized, identified and integrated.
Your whole analysis hinges on the political aspects. The obvious explanation for why Bush is taking this position is because, gasp, its the right thing for the country.
Your political analysis is way off. It may hurt him in his base, and that may indeed be very bad for him (given how his entire administration has been based on support from the base rather than building consensus), but the political problems will not come from the middle.
1:19 pm
Is it possible that we can have no majority? Can we add “just go home” to the ballot?
(Hope this does not post twice.)
3:06 pm
Tano:
Nonsense?
From Rassmussen survey of 4/7/06:
“Forty-six percent (46%) of Americans said that they prefer the candidate with the harder line on illegal aliens while 38% opt for the candidate who wants to expand legal opportunities for foreign workers to find jobs.
However, those who say the immigration issue is very important in determining their vote prefer the pro-enforcement candidate by a much larger margin, 67% to 23%. This suggests that the short-term political advantage on the immigration issue lies with those who want a tougher enforcement policy.
Fifty percent (50%) of Americans say the immigration issue is very important. Another 32% say it is somewhat important.
An earlier survey found that two-thirds of Americans believe it doesn’t make sense to debate new immigration laws until we can first control our borders and enforce existing laws. That same survey found that 40% of Americans favor “forcibly” requiring all 11 million illegal immigrants to leave the United States.”
Looks like the middle agrees with me and that your critique is the one that is utter nonsense. The only people who are strongly for this immigration bill are the center-left.
BTW - before you criticize someone, make sure you have an inkling of what you’re talking about.
3:51 pm
Dubya continues to disrespect the public, by going
And not just Dubya. There’s also a couple of bad senators who’re supporting what should be considered unlawful, to be giving amnesty to illegal aliens. The Washington Times (Hat tip: Michelle Malkin) has the following news
3:58 pm
Boycott Exxon Mobil
4:33 pm
Rick,
50% consider it an important issue. 2/3 of those favor tough measures. 50% X 2/3 = 33%. Thats your base.
You don’t specify from where your numbers come from (except the first set – are they all from Rasmussen?). If you want real numbers from a reputable, nonpartisan firm, look at the extensive analysis of immigration attitudes done by Pew.
Highlight.
Illegal immigrants already here should be…..
Allowed to stay permanently – 32%
Granted temp worker status – 32%
Required to return home – 29% (that base again)
DK - 9%
Don’t get me wrong here. I don’t mean to discourage you from pushing this line. It will be disaster for Republicans in the short term, and guarantee long-term disaster for the GOP with the latino vote. Go for it
4:36 pm
oops,
Pew know how to add, my reading is off. That last number – “required to return home’ is 27%, not 29
4:41 pm
Just who will be held responsible?
Should the GOP take a big hit this fall – as a number of people on both sides of the aisle are predicting – there will be no shortage of people looking to blame X or Y for what happens.
4:47 pm
If you want real numbers from a reputable, nonpartisan firm, look at the extensive analysis of immigration attitudes done by Pew.
Are you effing kidding me?
Rassmussen is the most accurate polling group around. They were the nation’s most accurate polling firm during the Presidential election and the only one to project both Bush and Kerry’s vote total within half a percentage point of the actual outcome. And what’s more, they poll likely voters – as opposed to Pew who polls everybody and their pet dog.
The impact on Republicans who don’t take an enforcement first position is much more pronounced because of the states where immigration is a hot issue; Florida, Texas, NM, AZ, and CA - all except CA Republican states. The farther you get away from the border, the less important the issue is. Ergo, Republicans have a lot more to lose by supporting the President on immigration than Democrats who will still use the issue to savage Republicans.
When 40% of the electorate wants to send 11 million people home, that goes far beyond whatever your idea of “the base” is as far as enforcement is concerned.
5:44 pm
If the GOP kicks this bill thru, the ‘06 election belongs to the Democrats… as well as the ‘08… unless of course, the Dems run Hillary in ‘08!
I must tell you, I am weary of defending this administration and then being defecated upon.
5:45 pm
Rick,
C’mon man, get off your kool-aid. This is absurd:
“Rassmussen is the most accurate polling group around”
You want I nice demonstration of their accuracy? Just go to one of your RW sites, RealClearPolitics, and look at the Prez approval charts, updated daily. You can see that for every single day, Rasmussen floats along, 5-6 points above (pro-Bush) EVERY other polling firm.
Not convinced yet? Check out immigration numbers for other polling firms.
“The impact on Republicans who don’t take an enforcement first position is much more pronounced because of the states where immigration is a hot issue”
Yeah, well thats not what you originally said. Here you make the argument that Repubs need to play to their base. Originally you tried to claim that they needed to appeal to the middle. Anti-immigration sentiments are clearly a GOP base issue period.
“When 40% of the electorate wants to send 11 million people home…”
Well, the reputable firms say 27%. But whatever. 27-40%, that your base.
6:38 pm
When we Americans let others treat our country like it’s some goddamn global job fair and not our home, how the hell can we expect anyone to take our cries for immigration enforcement seriously?
I guess we’re all too busy blogging to actually do anything constructive about it. If members of Congress, the Senate and the President really thought this asinine amnesty program was going to hurt them politically, they’d drop it like a hot potato. But let’s face it, with Dhimmicrats licking their chops over all those potential votes and Republicans slapping each other on the back, knowing all that PAC money from industries that rely heavily on illegal labor will keep rolling in, there’s not one iota of incentive for them to act on our behalf.
BTW, anyone – whether American or not – who says illegal immigrants are only here doing the jobs Americans won’t do really needs to be bitch-slapped three ways to Sunday.
8:21 pm
Sirius,
Trite turns of phrases aren’t all that convincing in the end. There are 12 million illegals here, and most of them working. Unemployment is low, some say down near the levels that indicate effective full employment (just ask any republican). So where is the problem with the illegals? Who is going to do the work if they werent here? And please tell, what would be the effect on the economy of millions of workers being removed from the workforce in times of such low unempoyment?
Rick is really playing the unthinking yahoo here. The reason that the administration supports guest-worker programs is that they know, absolutely, that trying to remove these people is patently absurd. So its either find some way to bring them out of the shadows, or leave them underground.
9:25 pm
Somehwnere along the line I started to realize that things are going wrong and have come to be reconciled to it. Maybe it started with Myers nomination, I don’t know, but the beginning of separation had started. In a way, when you think it thru, if we lose house and senate, prez will pay the price EVERY DAY. This might be fun to watch. I know this must sound terrible but look at it this way, next time a conservative comes forward and we get him elected he will realize that yes we will walk away and not help elect in the off year or his re-election.
I still foolishly hold out hope that there is a WHY to prez actions, I do believe he is a passive-aggressive kind of guy and he likes setting one up to then take’em down. Likes to give’em all the rope they need to hang themselves. Is that what’s he doing? Time will tell but frankly I have been somewhat beatin’ down and tire of it.
Will he clean out the cia and state dept. or fbi? He still has a job to do. Again, time will tell.
10:33 pm
While I disagree with some of you about the immigration stance. It is interesting that of all times that Bush listened to France he to pick this one…......
Anyway our economy needs the cheap illegal alien labor. Most of the people coming from Mexico are actually working jobs most Americans wouldn’t want to do. Not only that but they work for far less than an American would.
The ones who actually take American jobs that really matter are the one who come on wrong visas to the US. For instance, workers from India and China come “legally” on H-1 visas (correct me if I am wrong) to work as programmers. The catch is that the visa is designed to bring in workers that the US is lacking. There are programmers in the US. The only difference is that the ones from India and China are willing to work for about $10,000 less. I have no problem with this because I am a capitalist. However, I am troubled with the question. Am I an American or a capitalist first? I have learned that capitalism is better for American in the long run. It has helped us and real involvement by the government outside of a guide has been harmful.
However, these people that are helping our economy flourish is doing so illegally. We may have a hissy fit when we speed, but we still broke the law. These “undocumented” workers or falsely documented workers did break the law. There are 12 million of them here, and we can’t truly determine who have been here illegally for two years or more from someone who just crawled under the barbed wire fence. I honestly believe this is a no win situation. That is why the Democrats are sitting back and watch the Republican party implode. The question that should be asked is not what should be done. It should be who started the heated debate. I can assure it was not the Republicans. Considering that this is an election year. The only ones who can profit from this are the Democrats. I am not dismissing the issue. I am just asking why not last year or even in 2004? That might have worked better than John Kerry, his constant reminding us of his Vietnam experience, and his “C” average at Harvard.
7:54 am
Tano,
Judging by your response, is it safe to assume that you’re one of the privileged few that enjoys some direct benefit from having 12 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the country? Perhaps you have a nanny for whom you don’t have to pay any federal taxes or a landscaper who doesn’t have to carry worker’s compensation insurance on his/her illegal immigrant employees…
In any case, there are two fundmental points regarding the rule of law that need to be addressed.
First, when we allow, and in some cases, encourage, foreigners to willfully break the law, how much longer do you think we’ll to be able to call ourselves a nation of laws?
Second, when we allow, and in some cases, encourage, AMERICANS to break the law by employing millions of illegal immigrants, how much longer do you think we’ll to be able to call ourselves a nation of laws?
Once we lose rule of law, think about what Bosnia looked like in 19956 and you’ll get some idea of what America will look like in another generation or so.
BTW, if my original observations were trite, yours were extremely myopic.
10:20 am
Rick:
I do not think it is right for the country, but Bush could pull this off and get away with it politically if he also closes the border effectively – but not in a token way.
BD
11:55 am
Sirius,
Nice try, but no,,,sadly I am not in the nanny-landscaper class, not by a long shot. Not that I would ever hire someone else to raise my kids, even if I could, but thats another issue….
Anyway, you ask a couple of “how long” questions. How long can we consider ourselves a nation of laws if…..
Well, we’ve been doing this (hiring illegals) for a long time now, so, the answer is “quite a bit longer than you think…”.
But I do appreciate your concern on some level. I dont think it is a good situation to have milllions of people outside the law. That is why I support regularizing them.
The problem is that the driving force in this country is the economy. And it has been, for a long time, a very vibrant, strong, growing economy. It demands labor. And the supply of labor has not been freely available to the economy, but rather regulated by politicians who write laws, establish quotas etc. with NO REGARD to the actual needs of the economy. Rather they simply respond to local political considerations. When something as amorphous as “the economy as a whole” demands X number of workers, but a congressman is running for election in a district where people are insecure about their jobs, what will the pol do? Restrict immigration, or fail to increase it to levels that the economy needs. For the pol, its a no brainer. Do that for a few decades and you have the present situation – “legal” levels of immigration that are totally our of whack with the needs of the economy. Market forces are powerful, and the labor market is no exception. People (workers and employers) will find ways around irrational limits.
Focusing your ire on the workers is not dealing with the issue. We need to align immigration policy with the needs of the economy. That means allowing those here now to stay – recognizing them under the law so that they can fully participate (including bargaining for better wages so they dont drag down everyone elses wages), and also demand of them the resoponsibilities we demand of all other citizens. And going forward, to have a mechanism in place to insure that future needs of the economy are met. Only then would enforcement work – you cant really expect to control a border if your own economy is pressuring people to cross in greater numbers than is allowed.
3:49 pm
Hey Rick,
You still reading comments on this thread? Here is some more empirical evidence that shoots your silly analysis out of the water.
From the WSJ poll today:
“By 61%-35%, Americans say illegal immigrants within the U.S. should be allowed to stay rather than be deported so long as they pay taxes and pass security checks. By 68%-28%, they express support for a potential Senate compromise that would allow for different treatment of those who have been in the U.S. at least five years, those here for two to five years, and those in the U.S. for less than two years.”
12:25 am
I have been emailing my two Senators, Grassley and Harkin here in Iowa with exactly what you have said here. Check out my blog. I even put an exchange of letters there between myself and Harkin. Grassley is the good guy. Harkin is the amnesty guy.
http://blogresponder.blogspot.com/2006/04/my-latest-letter-to-senator-harkin.html