Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Republicans Form Super PAC On Comprehensive Immigration Reform

— Republicans are searching for a way to engage the growing Latino voting bloc that heavily favored President Obama’s re-election campaign in 2012. Top conservatives publicly changed their stances on immigration. And a new Republican super political action committee has been formed on immigration reform.

The organization, Republicans for Immigration Reform, is spearheaded by Washington insiders Carlos Gutierrez and Charlie Spies. Gutierrez is the former commerce secretary under President George W. Bush and Spies is the co-founder of Romney super PAC Restore Our Future.

The two spoke about the goals of the PAC with the Washington Post:

The organization aims to undermine what organizers call the “extremists” who have pushed party nominees to stake out far-right positions such as opposing a pathway to legalization for millions of illegal workers, students and children.

Even before it raises money and establishes target races for 2014, it will help smooth the way for wavering Republican lawmakers to vote next year for an immigration overhaul.

“There’s currently only energy on the anti-immigration reform side, and we want to be able to provide some cover for Republicans that vote in support of an immigration reform approach,” Spies said.

Comments

Avatar for user 'Brittanicus'

Brittanicus | November 19, 2012 at 12:55 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

1986 A FAILED AMNESTY.THROUGH FRAUDULENT PROCEDURES AND COMPLETE LETHARGIC ENFORCEMENT.

ARE WE GOING TO REPEAT THE SAME ERROR TWICE..?

Americans work all their lives, in good times and bad times as we have currently, then illegal aliens broach our borders or just jump on an international jet and once here demand rights and the majority of these used up politicians reward them. I am placing prominence on the term illegal alien, not a legal immigrant. ILLEGAL ALIEN is a far cry from a responsible person who commits themselves to follow the law, come here and is pandered to by the court system, declaring we must educate their children or allow them to access our health care system. Legal immigrants come here and are settled here with a green card, except illegal aliens come here disrespect our laws. Although a majority are from South of our border, approximately 46 percent come by aircraft with no intentions of returning even though they came here on a visitor’s visa. Two question remain open to momentous decisions, why isn’t illegal entry never been asserted as a class 1 felony, or why overstays are never tracked? It strange those crewmembers that jump ship or stay without permission are hunted down by ICE. It is obvious to me that these two situations above, that illegal entry being a civil offense or the no mechanism to track visa overstays was deliberate. YES deliberate! Nothing has ever made any sense since the original blanket amnesty of the 1986 Reagan dynasty?

The responsibility for the estimated population of illegal aliens of 20 million plus, is more to the truth than the exaggerated 11 million. This number has remained the same for the past decade and it’s impossible to believe it? Numbers are manufactured by the overwhelming Socialistic journalists, editorial staff or reporters in the national press, or even several administrations over the years. Initially the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) gave 2.7 million illegal migrants and immigrants a path to citizenship, but beginning of 1997 those former illegal aliens had been totally replaced by new illegal aliens, and that the unauthorized population again stood at more than 5 million; through fraudulent applications and poor inspections by agents of the government. Badly regulated the procedures were not observed and the fact that the so called strict laws to prosecute illegal wrongdoers or the employers who hired them, was never enforced and the funding almost none existent and immigration surged.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Brittanicus'

Brittanicus | November 19, 2012 at 12:56 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

The likelihood of President Obama pressing for another insane path to citizenship for all illegal aliens already here, because of his promise will have huge major costs. Then we have nonchalant Republicans looking towards their future, who are now climbing into the a similar solution, hoping that if they kowtow to the minorities that they will gain headway. All I see is a massive flood of more and more illegal usurpers looking for a cheap ride from the U.S. taxpayer. Eventually, we will all pay in higher taxes that will be gleaned from citizens, whether black, white or any other racial makeup as another blanket amnesty will attract even more people. The only people, who will not pay a cent towards the new onslaught, are the “FREELOADERS” the people who think working for a living is a bad ideology.

Millions more desperate, people will think its open season on America, and the word will be shouted out and not just South of our border, but worldwide. Our only and final chance to stop the overwhelming rush of foreign nationals is to enforce our border. Former President Bush enacted the 2006 Secure Fence Bill which funded a two layer fence similar to the one of separating Israel from its enemies. A double parallel fence that in the long run could halt massive amounts of drugs and foreigners into our sovereign nation. In between each 15 foot fence would be a rapid interdiction tracks for the U.S. Border Patrol agents. For interior enforcement the full impact of “THE LEGAL WORKFORCE BILL” It contains E-Verify to oversee and audit businesses that hire illegal aliens and bring them to court. Immediately we must nurse an amendment into the 14th Amendment, which is a commonsense to stop pregnant females from illegally entering America, then claiming citizenship for a child. Not only do you pay for all the amenities of deliveries, but you pay for contrived citizenship of a child and everything from then on is on a birthright or naturalized citizens back of paying the bills and even Green Card Holders are not exempt.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Brittanicus'

Brittanicus | November 19, 2012 at 12:57 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

. If the taxpaying populace ever realized that the common denominator for the DREAM ACT AS IMPOSED BY PRESIDENT OBAMA was because of the illicit original introduction into our country from wherever, were decade’s illegal children or the unborn smuggled into our country.

OH! Incidentally—America is already bankrupt? How can you have a 16 Trillion deficit, with just about every state on the edge of insolvency and stating we are not already bankrupt? The feds can print as many dollar bills as they like, but China is our landlord now and our creditor. Whatever the fiscal cliff is, we have already passed that demarcation point. Of course come December the two political groups will come to some compromise, but it will be all a massive big lie. A fabrication of the fact that the U.S. government can juggle numbers, move the zero’s around to make it look good to the American population. They have lots of committees, pat each other on their back, congratulating each other on cutting back on taxes and spending, but in truth it will be one big carnival. AS usual, they will pass the astronomical dollar figure onto the next generations. First and foremost I personally think we need a restructuring of our ancient tax code, which applies a fair and equitable measure for all. So that everybody pays something and that only the lowest of incomes pays zero. No more subsidies deductions or any of the pleasures unions get, or any special interest groups—everybody pays?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 19, 2012 at 5:17 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

You again, we're you banned?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 19, 2012 at 5:27 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

"A 14-member panel on immigration statistics of the National Academy of Aciences issued a report, "Immigration Statistics: A Story of Neglect," June 1985, noting that all figures were "woefully inadequate" and favoring the low estimate if 2 to 4 million "illegals" actually residing in the US. During the 1970s California alone admitted an estiamted 782,000 legal immgrants and 1,086,000 "undocumented" immigrants, according to Dr. Thomas Muller's recent study, THE FOURTH WAVE: California's Newest Immigrants.

MANY people sought to BLAME this "fourth wave" of new immigrants for the economic crisis and high unemployment. Dr. Muller's study, however, LIKE OTHERS BEFORE IT, DID NOT SUBSTANTIATE THE CHARGE. It found NO DECLINE in job availability for no-immigrants in southern California, where nearly 70% of the new imiigrants located. Of these, 75% were Mexican, and the study found "NO statistical relationship between the size of the Hispanic population and black unemployment." -- James Cockcroft, OUTLAWS IN THE PROMISED LAND (Grove Press, 1986) pp 130-31

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 19, 2012 at 5:45 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

"Most observers agree that the 3 million immigrants who benefited from legalization, represent LESS than HALF of those who were actually eligible, and ongoing employer sanctions provisions result in discrimination against lawful immigrants of color." -- Bill Ong Hing, DEFINING AMERICA THROUGH IMMIGRATION POLICY, (Temple University Pr, 2004) p 183

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | November 20, 2012 at 11:25 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Brittanicus,

Your elevator doesn't quite get to the top floor when it comes to understanding this issue. Why should Americans of Mexican ancestry look at all the material aid given to other countries and not wonder why we can't act humanely towards Mexico? Do you think not invading them or not bombing them makes us a good neighbor? Canada and Mexico are excellent neighbors and our country wouldn't have flourished without them as buffers.

Hispanics of all ethnicities renounced the inhumane Republican proposals for immigration reform (reform?!?!). You'd go broke as a political analyst.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Jhagaz'

Jhagaz | November 21, 2012 at 8:33 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Brittanicus. So much fail.

"...is pandered to by the court system, declaring we must...allow them to access our health care system."

If "access" you mean long wait time in the E.R. you are correct.

"Although a majority are from South of our border, approximately 46 percent come by aircraft with no intentions of returning even though they came here on a visitor’s visa."

The percentage of people that come from south of the border, I'm CERTAIN do not arrive on airplanes, you probably didn't mean it like that, but misusing commas, makes your statement misleading.

"Two question remain open to momentous decisions, why isn’t illegal entry never been asserted as a class 1 felony,"

A class 1 felony designation is typically the most serious felony...For example, conviction...in Arizona can result in a sentence of 25 years to life in prison...Punishment...in Virginia can be life in prison, the death penalty, and/or a fine up to $100,000 US Dollars (USD). (www.wisegeek.com)>

See your comment: "America is already bankrupt"

Really, if these people had the money to pay the fines, I highly doubt they would come in the first place. Also thank you for equating Murder, to what amounts to Trespassing.

"why overstays are never tracked?"

See your comment: "America is already bankrupt"

"It is obvious to me that these two situations above, that illegal entry being a civil offense or the no mechanism to track visa overstays was deliberate. YES deliberate! Nothing has ever made any sense since the original blanket amnesty of the 1986 Reagan dynasty?"

Deliberate to what end? (Insert Conspiracy Theory Here)

"This number has remained the same for the past decade and it’s impossible to believe it?"

(I don't think you meant to ask a question there.)

Numbers are manufactured by the overwhelming Socialistic (Not a noun, certainly not a proper noun.) journalists, editorial staff or reporters in the national press, or even several administrations over the years."

If you don't agree with statistics get in line. If you don't agree with anyone's statistics get a larger sample.

Annnd I've ran out of care. Everyone else can take on the rest of this block text diatribe.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'casualobserver'

casualobserver | November 21, 2012 at 9:16 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Geez Britannicus, have a glass of Scotch and chill. The course of history marches onward. The Great Wall didn't keep the infidels from China, just as Hadrian's Wall didn't ensure the survival of The Roman Empire. So do you propose that we construct our version of the Berlin Wall along our southern border? And if, as you assert, 46% of illegal immigrants are coming in by plane then Bush's fence would need to be a bit higher than proposed.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 26, 2012 at 12:25 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

So, no commentary on the actual article then?

Does anyone have any predictions about what the R proposals or platforms will look like? Somewhere between 'come one, come all' and 'walls aren't enough, we need minefields' there has to be a reasonable solution. What should it be?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 27, 2012 at 9:56 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Elevator. lol That's a good one!

To answer Benz's question, how about Republicans shooting themselves in the foot??? Republicans failed to get the Latino vote (compare to Bush II) because Romeny and others totally alienated them if not, demonstrated total hostility toward them. The mainstream Repubs failed to regin in their Nativst faction and paid the price! lol Being both blind and impractical, they have failed to capitalize on the "Latino vote"--although I reject that idea of a "bloc" because Latinos are just as varied politically and culturally as any other group. However, on this issue, you will find formidable opposition--and not just from Latinos.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 27, 2012 at 5:09 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

So MA, what should they do? If you were a R strategist, what platform would you adopt?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | November 28, 2012 at 11:57 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Benz,

I know you addressed the question to MA, but I have a humble suggestion: Accept the fact that the American of Mexican ancestry constituency is here to stay and should be taken seriously. That is, unless you can explain why issues important to AOMAs have to take a back seat to AIPAC, the Americans of Taiwanese ancestry, and the Cuban-American bloc in Florida. Those constituencies play a heavy hand in determining our foreign policy, and receive material benefits from American taxpayers. Why not take a humane stance towards Mexico?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 28, 2012 at 2:35 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Sorry, could you be more specific? What do you mean humane? Are we being inhumane to Mexico now? Should we (for example) treat Mexico in 2013 like Cuba in 1965 and grant them refugee/asylum status? Do you think we should open the border and naturalize anyone who asks for it? If not, what is a reasonable (humane?) limit on immigration?
It seems like any time someone proposes to limit immigration in any way they are shouted down as unreasonable or anti-Mexican (or both) but I really can’t see a clear line in the debate where we aren’t violating something pretty important to some special interest. Perhaps that is just oversensitivity on my part.
If we do grant amnesty, should we also grant citizenship? If so, what do we say to the people who did apply, pay the fees, undergo the interviews, wait for approval, etc.? And why would we expect anyone to abide by new rules if there is no lasting disincentive?
If we adopt reform that does not accommodate everyone who wants to immigrate, how do we expect the reform to stop the illegal crossing?

I recognize that people with my skin tone are less and less in the majority. That doesn't bother me at all. The major sticking point I have is national and cultural loyalty. If one is so unhappy in Mexico that one would illegally emigrate to be in another nation, why would one then fly a Mexican flag, continue to speak only Spanish and agitate politically to allow more of the people one is escaping from to follow one into that new nation? Why not instead embrace the culture and language of the adopted home as fully and as quickly as possible?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 29, 2012 at 10:46 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Take a practical, pragmatic approach, Benz. Like the US Chamber of Commerce. Read their study on undocumented immigration: "Immigration Myths and the Facts Behind the Fallacies." These people are hardly "leftwing." They represent the more pragmatic, intelligent, John Huntsman type Republican. A few years ago David Brooks wrote an article, "Immigrants as Social Conservatives" about how many Latino immigrants actually have more in common with social conservatives than they would admit. Sadly the party is soos steeped and hijacked by the restrictionist crowd, that it blinds them to a potential social and voting asset. Ah, but of course, I've seen Brooks criticized for not being a 'REAL" conservative.

It's not about Left or Right on this issue, Benz. If you know ANYTING about the history of immigration in this country, or labor history, you will discover that Gompers and the AF of L had a long restricitonist policy, and yet Gompers was the "liberal" of his day. He even joined the racist Right of his time in opposing all Japanese immigration .

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 29, 2012 at 12:10 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

I do not know why you think I might oppose practical or pragmatic ideas. I would simply like to understand what those look like to people arguing for change. Want to modify the policy? Fine, what do you suggest?
I am trying to be specific when I talk about loyalty and group identity and not drift into social conservatism. I think the two are distinct and need to be addressed separately (not to mention, the most famous policies of social conservatism are extremely limiting of individual freedom.)
What do you want to accomplish? How do you intend to get there? How will you treat those who have abided by the current rules as compared to those who have not in a fair and humane manner?

I agree that it isn't Right vs. Left. It is legal vs. illegal though and we need to resolve that equitably.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | November 29, 2012 at 12:35 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Benz,

Inhumane = threats of corralling Mexicans and employing Gestapo-style tactics.
Humane = a reasonable solution.

FYI: Mexicans leave Mexico for the U.S. because lower-rung jobs in our shared labor markets pay better here. They don't leave Mexico because they don't like it. Have you ever spent time with Mexicans in Mexico? Say what you want about them, but they know how to live. They're a highly sociable and adaptable lot who can turn even the most mundane things into magical experiences. Unfortunately, there aren't more depictions of their lives in literature or popular culture.

Stereotyping Mexicans and Hispanics is why Republicans can't win them over.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 29, 2012 at 3:55 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Where are you seeing any serious suggestions of corralling or torturing prisoners to inform on their coconspirators (or are you alluding to something else)?

This seems to be an aspect of what I am talking about though. While I am sure there are numerous reasons such a large number of persons emigrate some of it IS because they don't like an aspect of Mexico. Sure, the wages are bad... so why go someplace where the wages are better and then try to recreate the culture that produces bad wages? Why not assimilate instead?

Can you imagine an immigrant district of San Francisco full of Chinese flags and people speaking only Mandarin who marched in protest demanding the government allow large numbers of their countrymen easier immigration and are forming political blocs to make things more like they were back in China?

If someplace is so bad that you can no longer live there, be loyal to your new home and make it the best place you can. If the country of origin isn’t that bad, why not stay and make it better? Immigration isn’t an easy or trivial undertaking. I imagine doing so illegally is even more difficult. There has to be some major motivation to impel such an action.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 29, 2012 at 9:40 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Well see, Benz, you're already making it black and white and shutting yourself off to any agreements or settlements or proposals. So my question is why do you even bother what we have to offer if you have already closed your mind?

Read the above mentioned Zhang study. I've already printed out all 155 pages. Read the US Chamber of Commerce piece I mentioned. Look up the Rand Corp (hardly a bastion of liberalism) studies as well. All these demolish the preconceived myths, generalizations and distortions.

The other issue of note here, is that a good number of clandestine border crossers DO NOT come here to settle permanently, rather they come for seasonal work or to earn a certain amount, then return home. They even give them a name for this in southern Mexico.

You ask what would I do as a Romney "adviser" then you run away when I start talking about social conservatism. What the blank was Romney if not a social conservative, Benz??? If Republicans want to continue shooting themselves in the foot, fine by me because I'm not one of them.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | November 30, 2012 at 1:05 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

MA is on the mark in writing that Mexicans seek seasonal work and wages instead of permanent settlement. Benz, do you go to work out of a sense of patriotism or individualism? Heritage and employment are tangentially, not directly, related.

What is our "culture" anyway? "Mom, baseball and apple pie" are antiquated. Whether you like it or not, we now have "me, football and fast food." Things change and we've tried so hard to preserve our "culture" that it became something else. It was a fallacy pushed onto us by Madison Avenue. Even Thanksgiving has turned into a convenient shopping day for a signficant percentage of our country. Arguing that our culture is dying because of immigrants is a xenophobic joke.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | December 1, 2012 at 11:50 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Screenwriter and director Paul Schrader, (TAXI DRIVER, RAGING BULL) once said in interview that he liked his country "mongrelizized" (that's a joke film reference) because that's what gives it color. He saw no threat but rather welcomed the changing demographics--which are simply fact.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | December 3, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

"Benz, do you go to work out of a sense of patriotism or individualism?"
Honestly both, in varying combinations on different days.

Separately, having read your suggested chamber of commerce piece I find my expectations may have been too high. When my in-laws immigrated (to Canada) from Germany after the war they didn't speak English, but now speak it quite well. That was the 'standard' I was using to compare to and it seemed to me (anecdotally, without actually looking at a study) that there was a significant portion of people that I live around who are having trouble communicating in English. I will try to adjust my expectations. To be fair there is a substantial native population with an atrociously poor grasp of English as well.

As to culture I'm not talking about food or sporting preferences. What I want to know is who is paying for what and who is abiding by what laws. There seems to be an emphasis in pointing out the temporary nature of many of the immigrants, which seems odd considering the previous argument about sufficient assimilation. If the guest worker program needs additional billets why not just say so? Make an economic argument, propose a number and defend it. As previously stated, we can discuss practical and pragmatic ideas.

Having had this discussion, I think I answered my own question. R strategist should probably focus on the economy; expand existing program billets to account for increased demand in temporary workers which will eliminate that argument. They can then focus on enforcing the other existing laws regarding permanent residence.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | December 3, 2012 at 11:41 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

BENZ, which war and how soon after? And it sure doesn't sound like they settled in Quebec??? But pray tell, what does this have to to with to discussion--that is if you're trying to turn it into a simplistic, fallacious black and white either/or argument, I don't see where "language" would be part of the argument.

expand existing program billets to account for increased demand in temporary workers which will eliminate that argument."

Yeah, I can see see a bunch of citizens with AA's and BA's doing stoop labor, cleaning your latrines and slaughtering your cattle. Yeah, that's a good one, Benz. I overestimated you.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | December 4, 2012 at 7:36 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

WWII, near Toronto, in the early 50’s (I think, not sure of the exact time). It has to do with my expectations of immigrant assimilation and integration. Semi-tangentially, KPBS reported this morning that CNN was starting up a new news service in Spanish to serve the expanding demand around LA.

As to you last point, two responses;
What makes you believe that expansion cannot include targeted skills (regardless of education) for specific jobs? A skilled butcher may or may not have an educational background resulting in a degree, but it really doesn’t matter as far as I can tell.
If you could not profitably work in your home country and were seeking employment abroad, would it matter how educated you were? If the physical job available were one you could perform would you take it? Does education somehow make one unable to physically work? Or make one ‘too good’ to do it?

You seem to be making some assumptions that I am not, as well as overestimations apparently. Do you have anything constructive to add?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | December 4, 2012 at 11:12 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Not physically but FAR less likely. You seem to "overestimate" the American will to work: I guess you missed this: Farmers: Foreign laborers 'work harder' - Valdosta Daily Timesvaldostadailytimes.com/local/.../Farmers-Foreign-laborers-work-hard...Cached
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Sep 2, 2012 – According to South Georgia farmers, most produce-harvesting jobs go to foreign workers simply because Americans don't want to do the job, or can't. ... “They think they can, but when they find out what it is, that they have to keep up with ... the labor, the DOL advertises for domestic farm workers in classified

I fact, I remember the late Falwell criticizing his "flock" for shying away from manual labor. A lot of white middle class people. Why do you suppose?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | December 4, 2012 at 12:46 p.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

I suppose it is because many of us think we have better options. That being said, if those other options are not present a lot of us could and would work in laborious jobs. I believe the human will to work is directly linked to the satisfaction of needs and desires. If the only way to attain that satisfaction is to work, then the work will occur. Otherwise many will choose not to.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | December 5, 2012 at 10 a.m. ― 1 year, 4 months ago

Back to the gist of the article. Hispanics are a very real constituency and they're becoming increasingly more politically sophisticated. They're here to stay. Republicans, proceed with respect and caution.

( | suggest removal )

Forgot your password?