Immigration law

[TracyCoxx]

Obama's 2012 campaign strategy is starting to take shape and being the dirty politician he is I think we all expected this: If you can't count on your own citizens to re-elect you, just make new citizens!

Originally Posted by NumbersUSA

Senators Challenge Pres. Obama on Rumors of Executive Order Amnesty

Several Senators have learned of a possible plan by the Obama Administration that would provide a mass Amnesty for the nation's 11-18 million illegal aliens. Led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), eight Senators addressed a letter to the President asking for answers to questions about a plan that would allow DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to provide an amnesty if they can't secure enough votes for a bill in the Senate.

The letter that was sent to Pres. Obama earlier today asks the President for clarification on the use of deferred action or parole for illegal aliens. The executive actions are typically used in special cases and are evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but if 60 votes can't be secured in the Senate to pass a mass Amnesty, the Administration may use the discretionary actions as an alternative.

Click here for text of the letter signed by Sens. Grassley, Hatch (R-Utah), Vitter (R-La.), Bunning (R-Ky.), Chambliss (R-Ga.), Isakson (R-Ga.), Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Cochran (R-Miss.).

[randolph]

Amnesty would be the last straw. My support for Obama has been eroding rapidly. He is sold out to corporate interests just like all the other politicians. The amnesty back in the early 1990s failed and this time would be no different. Unfortunately, the Repubs. provide no sane alternative.

If I could learn French I would move to Provence and take up painting.

[Sadist]

Didn't Ronald Reagan sign the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 into law???? In case you were unaware, the Act contained the following:

* required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status, and granted amnesty to certain illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously
* made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants (immigrants who do not possess lawful work authorization)
* granted a path towards legalization to certain agricultural seasonal workers and immigrants who had been continuously and illegally present in the United States since January 1, 1982

Looks like Reagan was trying to create new citizens to vote for the Republicans.

[smc]

Originally Posted by Sadist

Didn't Ronald Reagan sign the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 into law???? In case you were unaware, the Act contained the following:

* required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status, and granted amnesty to certain illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously
* made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants (immigrants who do not possess lawful work authorization)
* granted a path towards legalization to certain agricultural seasonal workers and immigrants who had been continuously and illegally present in the United States since January 1, 1982

Looks like Reagan was trying to create new citizens to vote for the Republicans.

Thank you for the best kind of retort to these farcical contentions that any of the actions being taken or considered by the government at present regarding immigration are designed to change the demographics of the country deliberately for electoral gain.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Sadist

Didn't Ronald Reagan sign the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 into law???? In case you were unaware, the Act contained the following:

* required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status, and granted amnesty to certain illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously
* made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants (immigrants who do not possess lawful work authorization)
* granted a path towards legalization to certain agricultural seasonal workers and immigrants who had been continuously and illegally present in the United States since January 1, 1982

Looks like Reagan was trying to create new citizens to vote for the Republicans.

I think republicans and independents all agree Reagan's amnesty was a complete failure.

[randolph]

Republicans take note.

Robert Creamer Political organizer, strategist and author
Posted: June 24, 2010 08:37 AM

BIO Become a Fan
Get Email Alerts Bloggers' Index











Evidence Arizona Immigration Law May Be Fatal Mistake for GOP







There is compelling new evidence that Republicans will rue the day that they allowed their virulent anti-immigrant wing to grab the controls of the Republican Party.
In fact, contrary to much of the pundit chatter, a drama is playing out this fall that may doom Republicans to permanent minority status in America.
The passage of the Arizona "papers, please" anti-immigration law has forced Republican politicians around the country into a political box canyon that does not offer an easy escape. For fear of offending the emergent Tea Party - and other anti-immigrant zealots in their own base -- they are precipitating a massive realignment of Latino voters nationwide.
According to data released by Public Policy Polling (PPP), Texas Governor Rick Perry has lost his early lead over Democratic challenger Bill White and the race is now tied. The movement from a previous PPP poll in February comes entirely from Hispanic voters. PPP reports that:
"With white voters Perry led 54-36 then and leads 55-35 now. With black voters White led 81-12 then and 70 -7 now. But with Hispanics Perry has gone from leading 53-41 to trailing 55-21....there is no doubt the (Arizona) immigration bill is popular nationally. But if it causes Hispanics to change their voting behavior without a parallel shift among whites then it's going to end up playing to Democratic advantage this fall."
The punditry sometimes forgets that in politics intensity is often just as important as poll percentages. For many Hispanic voters, the Arizona immigration law is an insult. It is an attack on their very identity. And it is certainly a litmus test that tells a Hispanic voter whether or not a political candidate is on their side - the critical threshold test of voter decision making.
The same is simply not true for non-Hispanic voters. As a result, by allowing the Party to be defined by the anti-immigrant zealots - and refusing to lift a finger to pass comprehensive immigration reform in Congress - the Republicans are playing with political fire.
In fact, given the fact that Hispanics are the fastest-growing segment of the American electorate, the Republicans are playing with permanent marginality.
As if to sharpen their anti-immigrant brand, last week the Texas Republican State Convention voted for a platform that included a plank calling on the state government to adopt a state law like the one in Arizona.
But Texas is far from the only place where the emerging Latino backlash is in evidence. PPP reports that its latest polls in Colorado show that incumbent Democratic Senator Michael Bennett has gone from tying his opponent Republican Jane Norton to a three-point lead largely because his lead among Hispanic voters has soared from 12 to 21 points.
California Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman felt compelled to back tough anti-immigrant measures to get the Republican nomination. Now her support among Latinos is hemorrhaging, dropping from 35 to 26 points from March to May. Since the primary, Whitman has begun to waffle on her tough anti-immigrant stand but the damage has been done - what's more, it's memorialized in videos that Democrat Jerry Brown is sure to loop over and over on Spanish language TV.
Even in districts where the Hispanic vote is not large, big declines in Republican support could prove decisive in otherwise close races. After all the difference between getting 49.9% and 51.1% means everything in an election.
The bottom line is that by passing the Arizona "papers, please" law, Republicans - especially in the West - have awakened a sleeping and growing giant.

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

Republicans take note.

Evidence Arizona Immigration Law May Be Fatal Mistake for GOP

The view expressed in the article you posted above is the conventional wisdom among political scientists across the political spectrum, but at the risk of seeming to defend the positions that have been expressed in this thread I would like to take exception with part of its premise.

The calculus is about electoral success, indeed electoral viability altogether. Those in this thread who agree with the Arizona law, and who have gone further to promote even more direct action against immigrants who are in this country without documentation, should be assumed to be expressing their principled position without regard for whether they are "popular" as measured at the ballot box, either directly in the form of referenda or indirectly in the form of the success of this or that candidate.

I find the views expressed here to be reactionary, in the classical definition of that word in political science, and a recipe for disaster. Nevertheless, I salute those who are willing to express their views with such passion and vigor. The reality of a changing world (not deliberate demographic reengineering, as one poster has suggested) will relegate them to permanent minority status soon enough.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by smc

The view expressed in the article you posted above is the conventional wisdom among political scientists across the political spectrum, but at the risk of seeming to defend the positions that have been expressed in this thread I would like to take exception with part of its premise.

The calculus is about electoral success, indeed electoral viability altogether. Those in this thread who agree with the Arizona law, and who have gone further to promote even more direct action against immigrants who are in this country without documentation, should be assumed to be expressing their principled position without regard for whether they are "popular" as measured at the ballot box, either directly in the form of referenda or indirectly in the form of the success of this or that candidate.

I find the views expressed here to be reactionary, in the classical definition of that word in political science, and a recipe for disaster. Nevertheless, I salute those who are willing to express their views with such passion and vigor. The reality of a changing world (not deliberate demographic reengineering, as one poster has suggested) will relegate them to permanent minority status soon enough.

The above is a very erudite comment on the article I posted.

Whether the article proves to be correct will depend on a lot of things.
First, the dynamic between the legal immigrants who can vote and the illegal immigrants who cant. Its possible considerable numbers of legals may support clamping down on illegals, after all they compete for jobs. Second the performance of the Obama administration. If Obama cannot articulate a positive solution and implement it, legals will not have a lot of motivation to vote Democratic. Third, I think legals will be just as outraged as the rest of us if Obama provides amnesty to the illegals.