Immigration Reform Surprise: Hard-Liners Lost, Pragmatists Won
New America Media , Opinion-Analysis, Frank Sharry, Posted: Nov 09, 2006
Editor's Note: Immigration restrictionists lost badly in the midterms, sending a message in favor of sober, pragmatic reforms that officials must heed, writes Frank Sharry, executive director of the Washington-based National Immigration Forum. IMMIGRATION MATTERS regularly features the views of the nation's leading immigrant rights advocates.
In the months leading up to Tuesday's election, the conventional wisdom in Washington, D.C., was that immigration would be a powerful wedge issue that would help the Republicans either limit their losses or even retain control of the House of Representatives.
The argument went something like this: "Immigration will prove to be the gay marriage issue of 2006. Blocking comprehensive immigration reform and approving a 700-mile fence will bring out the GOP base, draw support from conservative Democratic voters, and give Republican candidates some distance from an unpopular president on a controversial issue."
Congressman Brian Bilbray of California made just such a claim when he came to Washington, D.C., after winning a special election earlier this year to replace the disgraced and jailed Randy Cunningham. The mainstream press and the me-too political class bought it hook, line and sinker.
Not surprisingly, many candidates followed this logic, either out of opportunism or conviction. And how exactly did these candidates fare? Judge for yourself.
THE SENATE
Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) hit opponent Bob Casey for Casey's support for the Senate comprehensive bill that passed on a bipartisan basis last May. Santorum suffered the biggest defeat of any Senate incumbent in this election cycle, losing by 18 percent.
Katherine Harris repeatedly invoked Senator Bill Nelson's (D-Fla.) support for the Senate bill in her comeback attempt. She lost 60 percent to 38 percent.
Republican Tom Kean Jr. attacked Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) for his support of comprehensive reform. Menendez beat Kean 53 percent to 47 percent.
Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) were attacked for their votes in support of allowing legalized immigrant workers to claim credit for social security taxes they paid when they had been undocumented. Both won easily.
Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) was opposed by a one-issue candidate, former INS official and noted immigration restrictionist Jan Ting. Accused of supporting "amnesty," Carper won 70 percent to 29 percent.
THE HOUSE
In Arizona-8, Republican Randy Graf lost to Democrat Gabrielle Giffords 54 percent To 42 percent. This was a closely watched race for a toss-up district along the U.S.-Mexico border in a state in which immigration is the No. 1 issue. Graf made the prophetic statement, "If this issue can't be won in this district [by hard-liners], the argument can be made that it can't be won anywhere in the country."
In Indiana-8, House Immigration Subcommittee Chair John Hostettler was one of the featured Republicans in the summer "field hearings" held by the House GOP to stir up voters on the immigration issue. He lost by a wide margin.
In Arizona-5 hardliner J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.) is the author of the book "Whatever It Takes" about illegal immigration, who refused to vote for the controversial Sensenbrenner bill HR 4437 because he thought it didn't go far enough. Hayworth was upset by comprehensive reform advocate Harry Mitchell 51 percent to 46 percent. Two years earlier Hayworth won re-election by 21 points.
In Colorado-7, Republican hardliner Rick O'Donnell was trying to replace another Republican, Bob Beauprez, who vacated the seat to run for governor. In a front-page New York Times article during the campaign O'Donnell argued that immigration was the biggest issue in his district and that his views were much more popular than those of his opponent, comprehensive reform advocate Democrat Ed Perlmutter. Perlmutter won 54 percent to 42 percent.
GOVERNORS
In Arizona Len Munsil repeatedly attacked Democratic incumbent Janet Napolitano, an early proponent of comprehensive reform, for being soft on illegal immigration. Munsil proposed a half-a-billion-dollar border security initiative as his signature issue. Napolitano won 63 percent to 35 percent.
In Colorado Republican Bob Beauprez staked his campaign on attacking his Democratic opponent Bill Ritter for being soft on illegal immigration. He lost 56 percent to 41 percent.
In numerous states, Democratic incumbents and candidates came under fire from their opponents for being soft on illegal immigration and for supporting in-state tuition for undocumented students. In every case -- Kansas, Oklahoma, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Oregon, Iowa and Maryland -- the pro-immigrant candidate won and the hard-liner lost.
In California, Arnold Schwarzenegger took a different tack from many in his party. He moved to the center on immigration -- he stopped applauding the Minutemen, stated his regret for his support of Proposition 187 in the past, dragged his feet on approving the deployment of his state's National Guard for border duty and loudly criticized the Republican Congress for not moving on comprehensive immigration reform. He was rewarded with a huge victory that included 39 percent of the state's large group of Latino voters.
So much for the conventional wisdom that supporting comprehensive reform would turn out to be a loser and that being a hard-line hawk would be a winner.
Meanwhile, polls released before and after the election (see sidebar) found the following:
--among all voters, a strong majority soundly reject a hard-line, enforcement-only approach in favor of a pragmatic, comprehensive approach to immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for those working and living in the U.S. illegally;
--Latino voters see immigration as a defining issue of extreme importance; comprehensive reform with a path to citizenship has broad and intense support; and they punished the political party currently associated with a harsh tone and a hard line.
What does this mean for immigration reform in the next Congress? It means we may well have an opportunity to move beyond the stalemate in the current Congress on broad reform and towards a workable solution. But enacting a major reform on such a controversial subject is easier to thwart than to win and thus calls for a new approach to governing.
First, it will require our nation's leaders to follow through on their stated commitment to bipartisan problem-solving. Simply put, when it comes to immigration, without bipartisanship, there will be no solution.
Second, it will require a commitment to not only getting a bill enacted, but to enacting a bill that will actually work once implemented. Simply put, if it won't work, don't pass it.
If our leaders incorporate these lessons, we have a chance to make history. If our leaders revert to partisan bickering and finger- pointing, then those responsible for inaction may well face a frustrated electorate once again in 2008.
SIDEBAR-600 WORDS
THE PUBLIC DEMANDS SOLUTIONS
Two polls, one on the eve of the election, the other through the media's exit polling, confirmed earlier independent polls that the public wants a solution and wants that solution to be comprehensive.
In a Tarrance Group poll commissioned by the National Immigration Forum and the Manhattan Institute and released on Election Day, likely voters across the nation and in key districts and states were surveyed on immigration. Here are the key findings:
* Immigration is an important public policy issue to voters, but not a key issue driving voting in the mid-terms for the majority of voters.
* Voters support a comprehensive approach to immigration reform. More see what happened in 2006 (fence and enforcement resources) as a first step rather than as a solution (48% - 28%); want comprehensive reform next year rather than waiting to see how the fence and enforcement increase works out (50% - 37%); reject the idea that enforcement will drive immigrants out of the country (65%-32%); and agree that Congress should enact comprehensive reform next year (75% - 20%).
* Voters prefer a candidate who supports comprehensive reform over a candidate that supports enforcement-only (57% - 37%). Perhaps even more importantly, comprehensive reform supporters have more intensity than the enforcement-only supporters (40% - 27%).
* Voters are still ambivalent about a vaguely defined path to citizenship for those in the country illegally -- with half viewing it as "amnesty" (48% - 46%) -- but do not believe that a path to citizenship that involves paying a fine, working, paying taxes, living crime free and learning English constitutes amnesty (68% - 27%).
In exit polls conducted on behalf of the media on November 7, researchers came up with similar findings. According to press reports on the exit polls:
* Fewer than one in three cited immigration as extremely important in influencing their vote decision.
* Republicans had only a narrow lead with voters who said immigration was extremely important,.
* Roughly 6 of 10 voters said they believe that undocumented immigrants living and working in the U.S. should be offered a chance to apply for legal status.
* Democrats won support from 61% of those who support such a path to citizenship.
THE DOG THAT DID HUNT
Latino voters were not supposed to be much of a factor in this election. But look again. In an election eve poll commissioned by NCLR and conducted by the Lake Group, here is what they found:
* Latinos are energized about voting in this election.
* The issues on the top of the Latino agenda continue to be education and jobs/the economy, with the war in Iraq coming in third and immigration fourth.
* However, immigration was a great motivator in this election. The poll found the issue would have a profound influence on how this electorate votes.
* The treatment of the immigration issue and developments over the last year, is driving Latinos away from the Republican Party.
According to 2004 exit polls, President Bush won 44% of the Latino vote. Based on exit polls yesterday, House Republicans won only 27% of the Latino vote.
In addition, exit polls showed that 37% of Latino voters ranked illegal immigration as an extremely important issue, far more than was the case for all voters. Also, 78% of Latino voters said that those here illegally should be given a chance to apply for legal status, some 20 point higher than other voters.
WHAT NOW?
The public has spoken. The results are in. The demand is clear. Fix our broken immigration system with a tough, fair and practical solution. -Frank Sharry
See Related Articles Immigration Matters
Page
1 of 1
|
User Comments
chil420 on Nov 11, 2006 at 21:57:16 said:
now that the Democrats have WON.. we must play nice in the sandbox. but for the last 12 years as I recall be it Clinton in war/conflicts or not.. congress went a head & impeached him for lying about a private sexual desire. With a woman I might add.
these Republicans seem to have been covering up their dirty secrets to hold on to power yet running on FAMILY VALUES which makes the Foley case more important.
I don't recall Bill Clinton say " I will never have sex with any woman again"
Yes he was stupid to do such a thing knowing that the VAst Right wingers were after him, When Newt made sure that he could shut down the government this gave Monica the ability to get very close to our president. I always wanted to know where was our secret service protecting our president? why was this young spunky sexpot allowed that close to him?
unless it was an inside job? what was on that piece of pizza she fed him, then 30 min later she brings him another piece.. this is when she lifted up her skirt... and popped her thong in his face.. I don't know about you but a king's crown is heavy... and if there was a drug on his first piece of pizza, to lower his inhabitions, who's to say what might not have happened if she were kept out of his office.
she was stalking him.. I listened to the taped calls between Linda & Monica.. WOW!! linda was really trying to force Monica to say she had full blown sex with Bill..
now turn this around.. does anyone think that a full bottom gal could get into the oval office alone with Bush? or how bout a six pack of beer?
do you think the secret service would have allowed that to happen?
and never forget the words of Ken Starr " no one is above the law, not even the president of the united states " well, that was then but now.. it doesn't work that way.
lying about sex.. because you had not told your wife yet, is one thing, lying about WMD's to get us into war, is really bad! it is impeachable. but we Democrats are suppose to now play nice
no one will be held accountable! we just move on and shove all the lies under the oval office rug? we just let it all go?
why aren't the bush twin girls in Iraq what about George P Bush? he was on the campaign trail.. but why not Iraq and not the green zone either. O no..
I say it is time for the draft taking all the rich kids with the poor. when there are no jobs.. and there are no grants or loans to go to school on.. and even if they do go to school, by the time they are out, the job they trained for have been outsourced.
and we are suppose to play nice. NO if the table was turned we would be in hearings right now.
Kansas use to be red.. now it is BLUE.. and when our senators run again.. they will come back as blue too.
I am just thrilled that a lot of very dangerous republicans who got voted out! we don't have to listen to their lyin mouths anymore
I am sick of it all. also, I find it crazy that the media & gop expect the DEMS to clean up their messes, after 12 years in 2 and then try to get our own agenda done as well.
we will show them. we can chew gum & walk at the same time. If the repubs could impeach a twice elected popular president for a private matter while being a lame duck session... I think we can do the same thing. we can do lots of things if we work 5 days a week working 10 hour days unlike the losers who worked one day an a half if we were lucky.
we are not safe in America.. fact is the world is not safe at all... if you think of the big picture.. an astroid could wipe us out in a blink of an eye..
but don't let that bother you.. let's just keep killing each other .. and forget about the gift of life we were given.
shame shame shame on human nature
chil420 on Nov 11, 2006 at 21:24:45 said:
what would happen if we here in America woke up and all the immigrants were just gone? who would clean your motel rooms & work in the kitchens of your favorite food places to eat? I am an American Indian named by the invasionists Europeans who took our land by death & removal!
Katrina was a form of this kind of removal of an entire people from their lands.
We had homes & did not live in teePees as the government school books taught the young children in America & the movie industry had us to believe.
40 mules for the Africans, land & shelter for the removal in 1839 for the Cherokee & 14 other tribes, Katrina, New homes , 911 victims the truth, Hitler & the Jews , the truth & land, instead of years of warmongering.
JFK and the lies about his death. We are tired of being lied to so our leaders can commit crimes & still get their pensions & checks while they do their time in jail.. you know those kind of jails? good golfing jails.. that is what they will turn the Katrina land into a new golf course jail/prison for all the GOPers who will be doing time here after all the investigatons have found them guilty of war crimes & crimes against the constitution.
Meredith Broadhead on Nov 11, 2006 at 11:32:02 said:
If you earn low wages, you are more likely to oppose immigration of any kind. Go back to school and get some skills, the government is supposed to pay for you to do that--it owes it to you.
Tony Blair on Nov 11, 2006 at 04:09:17 said:
Wow, I don't understand why we make such a big deal of immigrants, remember all of us decent from immigrants, for god sake can somebody tell me how we can make this hard headed understand this. In 1986 there was an amnisty and I belive that a lot of people was against it but it happen anyways, and what was the result? This country welcome them and all this immigrants from 1986 assimilate and are living among us and many of them are even owners of their own companies. So stop talking bad about immigrants, they are here to help and make this country even better than what it is now. I am very proud of living in U.S. and yes I am an immigrant too and I have come a long way and I always going to be thankful of the opportunity given to me of form part of this great mix of nationalities that only make this country the more powerful country in the world.
Thank you and god bless america and all of what means to be part of this great country.
RC on Nov 10, 2006 at 18:34:08 said:
"Comprehensive" is code for amnesty. This was tried in 1986 with poor results. Now the number of illegals in the U.S. has quadrupled.
Studies show that ~80% of the 6 billion people on earth would prefer to live in the U.S.--but we cannot accommodate illegal entry, as a matter of law, fairness, and safety!
I do not believe for a minute that illegal immigration propelled Dems into Congress. It was lack of progress in Iraq.
But assuming illegal immigration did have such an effect, what does this say about those voters?
In short, it says they disrespect the rule of law and fairness. We have immigration procedures--follow them. Allowing a "comprehensive" solution before securing the borders will send an alarm world wide that America (as in Iraq) is not firm in its resolve--and this will act as a magnet for millions more illegals per year without end.
Those in Congress who do not support the Constitution (which calls for secure borders), are not doing their job--in fact, they care nothing of America. The American citizens will soon realize this.
RC
Doug Ross on Nov 10, 2006 at 15:07:41 said:
Oldest Spears is a Moron.
The War in Iraq. I am sick of people saying that President Bush bungled. We went in there and took out the Government, arrested or killed the ANIMALS that ran the country and committed Atrocities for decades! Then the insurgency and the terrorists took up arms. Please tell us how do you defeat animals that kill their own and ours by hiding behind women and children and dress like the general public. Real men that wish to fight do not do what these animals have and continue to do. The American soldiers won. They did what they were sent there to do and did it with HONOR.
Fred on Nov 10, 2006 at 13:10:38 said:
How many immigrants per year does the U.S. accept? A million? How many does any other country accept? How many people illegally enter the U.S. per year? Three million? Are these numbers really relevant when the law is not being enforced in the first place?
Why is it so important that the leadership of the U.S. represent foreign countries? Isn't the American government elected to represent the American people? Don't other countries have governments that are supposed to represent their citizens. This isn't about immigration, it's about wage depression to boost corporate profits.
Blacks are finally achieving some equality in pay and job opportunity today, so how do business leaders respond? They want to import a new slave race, largely hispanic, and anyone accused of opposing their pro-slavery agenda is accused of being a racist, when in fact, it's the pro-slavers who should be condemned as racists.
Then I wonder about the pyramid scheme called Social Security. With baby-boomers retiring, how many foreign laborers must be imported to support them? What happens when those foreign laborers start to retire. There will be no other border to open up and social security will fail anyway.
You people bicker about republican this and democrat that but fail to see that both the right and left feet are marching in the same direction.... toward socialism. A big nanny government populated by crooks on both sides of the aisle, all of them bankrolled by big business.
Perhaps America deserves to be turned into Brazil.
Russell Rhodes on Nov 10, 2006 at 11:47:24 said:
You claim this election was based on one issue-immigration. This is your typical slanted view of the US citizens. The real reasons the GOP lost was uncontrolled spending, last of ethics, lack of action on Social Security and Medicare, Bush's attempt at a dynasty and the lies to get us into the Iraq war. Both parties are to blame on immigration. As you have already forgotten, most US citizens want the illegals out and for the US to stop the crossing - whatever it takes.
Don Fischer on Nov 10, 2006 at 11:18:43 said:
The Republicans lost because 1)supporting the illegal war 2)letting big business have control 3) not doing enough to STOP illegal immigration
Antonio on Nov 10, 2006 at 11:09:25 said:
This comment is sickening---> \"GREAT article! Immigrants from Mexico are a great help for this nation. They paid SS income taxes since the day they arrived here. They are helping building this great nation of ours. They ARE workers, not criminals like many of the so-called, \"native Americans.\" Just look at the prisons, 99% of the prisoners are American born citizens! As a matter of fact, we need more REAL workers from Mexico, the more the better. This election proved once and for all that a REAL immigrant plan is needed, not hostile action like the republican, neo-con morons want. Good! I\'m glad and MILLIONS of other Americans are VERY happy to know that the neo-con morons are OUT of office! THANK-GOD! Praise the Lord!\"
You are either a total idiot, or a radical, left wing, socialist , America hater.
Most illegals do not, and have never paid income tax..They usually get paid in cash. They are stealing people SS#\'s , and identity, ruining the lives of good , hard working Americans. They are breaking the back of our health care, and educational systems....And your wrong about the prison population, 21% of all felons in our prison system are illegal aliens.
Stop spreading the BIG lie.
KJB on Nov 10, 2006 at 10:00:58 said:
The Republicans lost because they abandoned the Christian values they were elected to protect. The ONLY time ANY politician PRETENDS to care about the concerns of the voters is during election time. Their only concern is to fatten their pocketbooks and further their agenda of power. This is called, Taxation Without Representation. The taxpayers pay for politicians mansions and limo's while losing their own homes and cars because jobs (that Americans WILL do) are being taken by illegal's (who do NOT pay any payroll taxes.) Taxpayers pay for the BEST medical care for politicians while being poisoned by "big pharma", (courtesy of the Federal agency that is supposed to protect them) and paying outrageous health insurance payments for little or no benefit. Do you actually think that ALL Americans are stupid because we are being represented by traitors? Unemployment is down ONLY because "big business" is NOT being forced to pay "just" unemployment benefits to the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs to illegal's. This Country WAS great. Now, We are being attacked from within and everybody is so busy being "politically correct" that they are too blind to see the truth. Our most vulnerable American citizens are being murdered in the womb (while taxpayers pay for delivery of illegal babies) and in the nursing homes and hospitals, because of all the money being funneled into special interests and illegal welfare and housing programs. ILLEGAL immigration ONLY benefits the rich and big business, if they want them they should support them. The money that is being spent supporting ILLEGAL immigrants should be given to the vulnerable elderly Americans who have already paid their dues and were promised protection by our U.S. government. Of course, that doesn't apply when there is no U.S. Constitution, which is the next thing America loses. Unless people stand up and demand change and accountability, there will be no America left for illegal's to come to, for their free handouts.
Jim Newman on Nov 10, 2006 at 09:29:45 said:
You don't know what you're talking about. Mexicans are trash. They destroy every American neighborhood they invade. Once Mexicans move in, you'll notice: gangs, graffiti, trash in the streets, old mattresses dumped on the sidewalks, rampant poverty, 53% high school dropout rate, failing hospitals, more poverty, more gangs, etc.
DEPORT THIS 3RD WORLD TRASH!!!
John Q. *LEGAL CITIZEN* U.S.A. Public on Nov 10, 2006 at 09:29:06 said:
There is no such thing as "immigrant rights". These "immigrants" these groups 'stand' for are not "Immigrants," they are
*ILLEGAL ALIENS*
Not 'one' *ILLEGAL ALIEN* has ANY 'rights' under this Nation's constitution, but, this isn't what these supposed "immigrant rights" groups have to say. They say-
It's 'OK' that people come to this Nation *ILLEGALLY* and now that they are here, they don't deserve to be deported, they have *RIGHTS* (of which they don't but only to be DEPORTED) and this 'issue' really 'is'- something about *RIGHTS* they DON'T HAVE.
Disrespectful, lying, cheating, stealing *ILLEGAL ALIENS* and this Nation that stands for ANY 'rights' group? What FREAKIN' 'RIGHTS' are you 'supposeably' 'fighting' for?
Goto Hell you lying, cheating, stealing *ILLEGAL ALIENS* and you disrespectful 'leaders' of the protagonists whom 'claim' you have ANY 'right' to be HERE.
Just wait, you'll see.
JQ "LCUSA" P
Cameron De Smidt on Nov 10, 2006 at 09:05:18 said:
Frank Sherry, the National Immigration Forum and the Manhattan Institute are notorious purveyors of Horsecrap. The Republicans lost - according to the exit polling conducted by every network on election night because of President Bush's disasterously inept bungling of the Iraq war. Add a perception in general of corruption and deficit spending and you get the results shown. Put down your Tarrance Group Comic Book - Republican legislators did NOT lose because they were tough on ILLEGAL immigration. And stop intermingling the term immigrant with the issue of illegal entry and presence in this country.
Bill Chelmowski on Nov 10, 2006 at 08:34:18 said:
How many of those Hispanic voters were legal?
Paul Ross on Nov 10, 2006 at 08:27:04 said:
JD Hayworth has not lost yet. And up here in Minnesota, it was the hardliners who all won. I.e., Michelle Bachman (over a huge name in MN, Wetterling) and John Kline over Rowley. In almost every case where a hardliner lost...it was usually due to intense allegations of either excessive subservience to Bush...or of outright corruption. That was the case against Kennedy...who lost. And against JD Hayworth I might add. And also all of the Ohio delegation. And even of such longstanding stalwarts such as Curt Weldon in Pennsylvania.
Your analysis has already been totally rejected by the better pundits, from Limbaugh, to Ingrahm to Hewitt. You are way out in Left Field...undoubtedly trying lamely to do spade work for the impending "deal" between the RINO-IN-CHIEF warming the seat in the White House and the DemocRATs.
Barbara C on Nov 10, 2006 at 08:21:29 said:
This is not the reason the Democrats won! It was due to the outsourcing of our good paying jobs! Just take a look at the States that voted Democratic this time...all have lost thousands of jobs!
And I do not know who you are polling, but it must not be the people living in the border States.
Millions of Americans want that wall built, and many deported. Why should Americans' take care of Mexico's failed political policies? Their own rich elite threatened to move out of Mexico if they were to be taxed to care for their own!
If they won't care for their own people, don't send them here for us to do it!
There is a growing problem in this country, because our government turned a blind eye to immigration law enforcement....American's are now fed up to the teeth with this mess!
Oldest Spears on Nov 10, 2006 at 08:19:58 said:
GREAT article! Immigrants from Mexico are a great help for this nation. They paid SS income taxes since the day they arrived here. They are helping building this great nation of ours. They ARE workers, not criminals like many of the so-called, "native Americans." Just look at the prisons, 99% of the prisoners are American born citizens! As a matter of fact, we need more REAL workers from Mexico, the more the better. This election proved once and for all that a REAL immigrant plan is needed, not hostile action like the republican, neo-con morons want. Good! I'm glad and MILLIONS of other Americans are VERY happy to know that the neo-con morons are OUT of office! THANK-GOD! Praise the Lord!
Barbara C on Nov 10, 2006 at 08:14:17 said:
This is not the reason the Democrats won! It was due to the outsourcing of our good paying jobs! Just take a look at the States that voted Democratic this time...all have lost thousands of jobs!
And I do not know who you are polling, but it must not be the people living in the border States.
Millions of Americans want that wall built, and many deported. Why should Americans' take care of Mexico's failed political policies? Their own rich elite threatened to move out of Mexico if they were to be taxed to care for their own!
If they won't care for their own people, don't send them here for us to do it!
There is a growing problem in this country, because our government turned a blind eye to immigration law enforcement....American's are now fed up to the teeth with this mess!
C Thomas on Nov 10, 2006 at 07:34:05 said:
The Government of the United States is not going to stop illegal immigration it wants a North American Union. We all will lose.
jim crum on Nov 10, 2006 at 05:26:33 said:
The thousands marching in the streets have stated their case very loudly. The media has fallen all over themselves to report their side of the story. However, has your paper, or any national media, dared to spend time on the actual costs of illegal immigration?
• Nearly a third of federal prisoners are illegal immigrants. Who is paying this bill?
• In the Southwest alone, dozens of hospitals are bankrupted and closed forever. Has anyone in your profession made an effort to show the impact this is having on our own citizens?
• Identity theft. It's a big issue now. Many victims are people who have had theirs stolen by illegals. I know of two such people whose information was passed to dozens of people.
• Voter fraud. Yes, it is an issue and it has changed election results.
• Disease. Health issues eradicated from this country years ago, are now popping up. Many are not treatable with current medication. Of course, you could try your local hospital, but then again, call first to see if they are still solvent.
• Erosion of our own social programs. The simple fact is that most illegals are low skill-low wage earners. As such, they are not a group that, even if legal, would generate any substantial tax revenue to offset the costs of caring for their needs. Meanwhile, our own poor are effected as programs struggle to remain effective and solvent.
• Social Cohesion. For any society to function, it must have a common language and culture. Lose either, and you are in big trouble. In the past, immigrants came here from across an ocean and they had to separate themselves physically and socially from their home country. Not now. Too many immigrants still see themselves as Mexicans, not Americans. The flags in the protests said it all.
• I humbly submit that we are not experiencing immigration, but wholesale migration of people. Our laws, our culture, our borders, and society cannot long exist if this continues unabated.
• If 10-20 million illegals are made legal, they will then be able to have family members join them here in the US. Work an average of five people per immigrant, and we could see as many as 75 to 100 million people arrive. We cannot absorb this number of people.
• Finally, a growing element within the open borders movement are whispering terms like reconquesta, and so forth. Many editorials published south of our borders are plain in their desire to see this happen. My response is simple: Thank God that the US did take these territories. Otherwise another 20 million square miles would be subjected to generations of mismanagement, a totally dysfunctional social culture, abysmal governance, and general chaos. Harsh words? Yes, indeed they certainly are! Before you condemn the comment, look at the results of how these societies operate, and then please say how the observation is wrong. After all, if things were even remotely functional, the problem of illegal immigration would not exist to begin with.
On a case by case basis, at an individual level, illegal immigration can be justified and any laws quite easily stepped over. The stories people tell are all similar, and all are very gut wrenching. From a global view, things change considerably, and the entire process has transformed into a social pathology that needs to be dealt with.
A good illustration of this came from a most revealing comment from Maria Borrayo: "I say grant amnesty to those who are already here. Secure the borders then, but don't harm those already here. Those people work hard..." (note: we all work hard)
How about firmly securing the borders and cracking down on employers first? After a few years of this, then let’s discuss what to do. Most citizens are tired hearing the cry of "yeah, but I'm here now", or "it was the only way I could get here" so often. From an individual basis, we can see the point. From a larger view, it is not appropriate, it is never going to work, and is no standard to set any policy. There will always be people who will say, "yeah but I'm here now, so don’t harm me"....
Many years ago, after a round of solemn promises, our Congress granted an amnesty with a promise to secure the borders, and punish employers who hire illegals. It seems fairly obvious to anyone that the amnesty went well, but the actual application to do the rest never happened. Any efforts to do so were strenuously opposed by politicians and illegal advocacy groups. Those who tried to enforce the law were branded racists, bigots, intolerant, insensitive, and ethnocentrists.
Finally, look at the polls. For many years now, nearly all are unanimous in showing the vast majority of citizens here in the US are fed up with the process and want to see the borders secured, the laws enforced, and any attempt to reward those who are not here legally ended. How often is this reported? Why are you not reporting this?
This is a nation of immense compassion and incredible generosity. We are also a nation of laws. To those who are here, we say “follow them, you are not above the law”.
-Name Withheld
Penny Patterson on Nov 10, 2006 at 04:38:57 said:
I don't believe that people who break the laws of other countries should be rewarded. I am for makining it a felony for illegals who are caught in this country. If you are caught in Mexico illegally it is a felony. I don't believe that we as legal citizens should have our tax dollars go to health care, social services, housing or other services for illegals. In the 1950's the late President Dwight David Eisenhower deported 10 millon illegals our government needs to clean them out again. Mexico needs to take care of their own. If our politicians won't do it then we need to vote them out! Our government needs to tell the rest of the world that our language is ENGLISH!
Doug Ross on Nov 10, 2006 at 04:21:58 said:
Everyone has their own opinion regarding illegal immigration. Some say they should go while some say they should stay because we need them.
The first thing to consider is that lax enforcement at the borders allows undesirables, drugs and terrorists to easily enter OUR Country. This has to stop. As for the people coming here to work WE, not mexico or any other Country, must determine how to allow honest hard working people to enter and work. We have to know who they are, who they are to work for, keep track of them and make them PAY fair taxes, PAY for housing, PAY for medical treatment and PAY a fee for every Dollar they send home.
ANY Law Enforcement Officer should have the right to check their papers. Just like we have to show identification when asked they should have to as well. Anyone found to have no or false ID should be arrested. I would rather pay big to enforce the laws of the United States than to pay even more to give illegals free medical treatment and education. We also must stop the practice of allowing an infant born on our soil to automatically be an American citizen. How stupid is this practice!!! Someone here illegally has a baby and it is given full rights just like someone that has family going back generations.
I am just thankful, believe this or not, that I will not be here on Earth 20+ years from now. The way we are going I would not want to see what will happen. There are a lot of things that must be changed or stopped but MY belief is that the worst thing is the degragation of the AMERICA that I and MY ancesters have created. If I wanted to live, talk and look like people from South America I would move there!!!
HELP
Gringo on Nov 10, 2006 at 03:48:41 said:
El Torro Cocca!
Joe Womble on Nov 10, 2006 at 03:39:56 said:
They should have run on the Marriage Protection issue. These measures passed by large margins.
Nia McArthur on Nov 10, 2006 at 02:44:53 said:
How about we adopt Mexico's immigration policy. To be a citizen you have to hold a FM3 visa for 3-5 years or an FM2 Visa for 5 years. You also must have between $1000 and $1800 verified monthly income for head of household and half that for each dependent.
Oh yes, let us not forget that all forms are in Spanish.
I only use this as an example due to the fact Mexico illegal immigrants make up the majority.
I'm all for a fair solution.
JD on Nov 10, 2006 at 02:02:27 said:
\"In Colorado-7, Republican hardliner Rick O\'Donnell was trying to replace another Republican, Bob Beauprez, who vacated the seat to run for governor. In a front-page New York Times article during the campaign O\'Donnell argued that immigration was the biggest issue in his district and that his views were much more popular than those of his opponent, comprehensive reform advocate Democrat Ed Perlmutter. Perlmutter won 54 percent to 42 percent.\"
Right next door, in Colorado-6, Republican candidate Tom Tancredo, one of if not the most outspoken critic on the immigration issue, who said on Fox News\' \"Hannity & Colmes\" show: \"Mexico is aiding and abetting an invasion of this country. They are part of the problem. In fact, they are creating situations along that border, using their own military, to protect drug trafficking into the United States, pushing their own people into the United States for a variety of reasons. It is an invasion.\" won his election 59%-40%.
Christian on Nov 10, 2006 at 01:56:50 said:
"So much for the conventional wisdom that supporting comprehensive reform would turn out to be a loser and that being a hard-line hawk would be a winner."
Please note that this article conveniently ignores Ohio Senator Mike DeWine's thrashing. Senator DeWine was President Bush's point man on amnesty for illegal immigrants. DeWine's support for "comprehensive reform" failed to protect him from Ohio voters' wrath. The U.S House representatives from Ohio, on the other hand, won reelection in spite of their opposition to Bush's "comprehensive amnesty" proposals.
So much for unconventional wisdom that supporting amnesty would be a loser.
ann on Nov 10, 2006 at 01:41:31 said:
I am sick and tried of all the analysis on this election already. Let me tell you most Americans are for building a fence & shutting down the borders. Most of the spanish & latinos that are in our country are illegals & they came here illegally & it is about time you realize that. I am & millions of other LEGALLY TRUE AMERICANS have paid our dues to this country & there are laws in the books for all of you to do it legally but for some reason you want to break all of our laws. I am sick & tired of have to pay all the social bills that come with the illegals like free health care, free schools, free driver licenses, free housing, welfare, paying for their prison time (when they should be exiled back to their country) & the list goes on and on. Also we need to change the law that every baby born in the US is a naturalized citizen & then their parents can stay here for free & don't have get a citizenship. If we only changed this one law, most of the Mexicans would not be coming to our land. This is the easiest way for them to have their children become US citizens & to rip off our country. I know we will see the true face of our President over this issue & it won't look pretty & he will go down in history as the worst President over this issue. Immigration policy has nothing to do with a tough, fair and practical solution. It is about obeying our laws & enforcing the law. City after city & state after state are cracking down on illegals & it is about time someone did something about it because our President & Congress are doing nothing but letting the Mexicans take over our GREAT country & destroying it from within. This is also part of political correctness that needs to be reined in! Your illegal people have no rights to inform our President & Congress what to do. Why don't you go & talk to the Mexican President to fix your economy and maybe there would be some jobs for them their. It is not our problem to solve, it is yours. Just want to remind you the reason for the change in leadership in Congress was because of the Iraq war and not about immigration. Sorry, I do not believe you are right in your analysis.
Matt Bruno on Nov 10, 2006 at 01:34:46 said:
What a joke. Our country is being overrun by a bunch of uneducated Mexicans and we are suppose to sit back and just let it happen. Any "American" who believes Mexico (and the rest of the world) has some kind of right to dump its problems on us is either a fool or a traitor.
Jim thomas on Nov 10, 2006 at 01:33:20 said:
"In Arizona-8, Republican Randy Graf lost to Democrat Gabrielle Giffords 54 percent To 42 percent"
- Giffords repeatedly said in her campaign ads that she "does not support amnesty". Was she lying? Probably. Nonetheless, she ran on it.
"In Arizona-5 hardliner J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.) is the author of the book "Whatever It Takes" about illegal immigration, who refused to vote for the controversial Sensenbrenner bill HR 4437 because he thought it didn't go far enough. Hayworth was upset by comprehensive reform advocate Harry Mitchell 51 percent to 46 percent."
- But wasn't it one of Mitchell's talking points during the campaign that he claimed Hayworth was 'too soft' on illegal immigration? This implies that he wouln't be easy on illegals? Was he lying? We'll have to wait and see.
Many of the freshmen Dems ran on relatively conservative platforms. That's one of the ways they defeated their Republican opponents. If they immediately begin sidestepping to the left, they may find that they are term-limited by the voters, and the Democratic party may find that it has only a 2-year majority in Congress. Pelosi might want to get her drapes at Wal-Mart.
jamsey comes looking on Nov 10, 2006 at 01:25:12 said:
Funny I have never been polled on anything. Exit poll or surveys or anything. I do not believe polls (exit) or otherwise as an American concensus Several hundred people polled donot speak for all Americans and polls can easily be manipulated. illegal aliens are killing the middle class in this country. They cost us over 350 billion a year. Our schools, hospitals, entitlement programs, jobs, salaries everything in our basic life is suffering. Of -sourse the latin voters want what they want. And here in florida illegals vote all the time. They come here illegally, they siphon off of us, they take our jobs, they don't speak our language, they fill our prisons, they kill 25 Americans everyday, they bully, murder and rape our women and children and even our animals, they steal from us everyday with their illegal babies, they don't respect our laws, our language or much of anything. They commit Id theft everyday. they are felons. And yes the American people are fed up alright. But, what we are fed up with is the fact that our representatives, do not represent us, they give instate tuition to illegals that native born legal Americans dont; get. Amnesty i don't think so. I want them all deported. America can do it. We removed 12 million of our men form our economic society during WWI to fight for our Freedoms, and we survived it very nicely. I am an American first and a native indian second. The president, and congress have defied their oath of office. To serve and protect the American People, not third world illegal (which makes them all criminals) aliens. You are pushing your ideology, because you have no facts, At least not real facts just selected to push your propaganda. I hope the socialist, communist, progressive dummycrats cave to illegals, it will be the end of that movement once and for all.
W. Morgan on Nov 10, 2006 at 01:20:16 said:
I think Frank Sharry's assessment was rather shallow and amateur at best. Although candidates like Graf and Hayworth lost, every anti-illegal immigrant measure on the ballot in the state of Arizona passed by landslide margins. I think that the corruption scandals, poor execution of the Iraq war by Rumsfeld, and an overall belief that the Republican party was not representing the core values of its constituents had more to do with the GOP losing the mid-term election, than stances on illegal immigration.
Jerry Davis on Nov 10, 2006 at 01:18:41 said:
You are sorely mistaken my friend, if you think for one minute that these people won based on their extremely upopular stance on immigration. This issue was almost mute compared to the fact that the GOP totally ignored their power base for the last eight years. If you think this will be the saving grace for demos continue to pursue this line of thinking. The political bloodbath that happened to the Reps. won't hold a candle to what's coming for the Democratic party.
Brian McGinnis on Nov 10, 2006 at 00:59:07 said:
From what I just read in your immigration article I have come to the conclusion that the voters became more stupid this year than ever before. According to your stats people want their wages depressed, their hospitals closing or emergency rooms packed with illegal aliens, their children's education curtailed because of non English speaking masses, their language and culture destroyed because of a new breed of immigrant that will not assimilate and their streets turning into gang ruled barrios.
I know , I live in California. Don't complain voters when the very politicians reach into your pocket to pay for them, after all the government has no money of it's own it picks one man's pocket to fulfill it's promise to give free stuff to another therefore insuring it's power.
Deborah Tomlin on Nov 10, 2006 at 00:46:26 said:
Simply put, IF Americans were fully informed of the consequences of legalizing millions of illegal aliens, THEY WOULD WANT THEM GONE, period! The Senate bill was a disaster and anything that comes down the pike that even smells like it will be fought by the same millions of Americans who have been fighting fo secure America an keep her a first world nation.
If you think Americans are aware of what's going on you are kidding yourself. 50% of Americans don't even know who Nancy Pelosi is!
Clem Poston on Nov 10, 2006 at 00:31:11 said:
I'm sorry but you haven't a clue. The republicans haven't done squat about illegal immigration and now because of the dog-n-pony show with the "fence" and NG you think or rather "conventional wisdom" says that we little people should have rewarded them with reelection? What planet are you from? The majority of American people support true border security, true penalties on businesses who support and hire illegal aliens and NO AMNESTY! That hasn't changed one iota regardless of YOUR conventional wisdom!
ted sallador on Nov 10, 2006 at 00:13:18 said:
The pharoahs (the house republican hardliners) hardened their hearts when there was an opportunity to show pragmatism and compassion as soon as the the senate passed the comprehensive immigration bill. When God said to pharoah "let my people go" the pharoah did not heed Him.
The same way happened among republican hardliners.Instead of negotiating with the senate, they did their field hearings to beat up on the "law breakers in their midst".
I believe on divine intervention when authorities
become adamant for selfish plotical reasons. \"Vengeance is mine, I will repay\" says the Lord. And indeed He heard the cries of the 12 million who are praying for compassion and legalization. He removed the republican hardliners on 11/7.What a vengeance.
Peter Carpenter on Nov 10, 2006 at 00:04:18 said:
Illegal Immigration. I'm for a comprehensive approach!
Social Security Shortfall. I'm for a comprehensive approach!
Nuclear Proliferation. I'm for a comprehensive approach!
National Debt. I'm for a comprehensive approach!
I'm for a new approach to governing!
I don't have to know anything, propose anything because...
I'm for a comprehensive approach!
Frank finishes with "Fix our broken immigration system with a tough, fair and practical solution" Apparently, he has no ideas of his own, nor does he know anyone else who has useful ideas. However, as long as he is for "a comprehensive approach", I am certain his intelligence is unmatched.
Jaynice Todak on Nov 09, 2006 at 23:41:12 said:
Just forget about the laws these people are breaking. As to jobs that Americans won't do...much because they have been hijacked by immigrants working for lower wages...while they get all the free benefits....I do not want to become one with Mexico...Let Mexico be Mexico and the U.S. the U.S. viva la differencia!!! Mexico is the richest country in the world in terms of natural resources, minerals, oil,. etc....why are we bailing them out????? This item is the most important question our country today...more important than Iraq that we protect our borders.....Jaynice
Ralph Haskell on Nov 09, 2006 at 23:29:41 said:
The Republicans lost becauce they Demacrats by another name.
Raymond Golich on Nov 09, 2006 at 22:53:51 said:
100% nonsense from someone in the pocketbook of Latino pressure groups. What a laugh! The American people are highly suspect of "push-polls" to advocate unlimited immigration from our great friend, Mexico.
75% of the American public favors not only stopping illegal immigration but reducing legal immigration modestly. Wake up Frank!
Bruno Lisarb on Nov 09, 2006 at 18:20:32 said:
Thank you
-->That was inspiring to say the least.
And to break another conventional wisdom, immigrants CAN read write and speak english very well.
Many thanks
Keep the good work