Feed on Posts or Comments 27 November 2014

Category ArchiveIllegal Immigration



Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 08 Apr 2014

Immigration Sense — And Nonsense on the “Right”

The Republican Party of Virginia’s Shaun Kenney groveling last week here before amnesty zealots was simply embarrassing. And former governor Jeb Bush’s bizarre declaration Sunday here * as well as senator Rand Paul’s earlier meanderings on immigration here ** all stand in stark contrast to senator Jeff Session’s careful policy analysis here and planning here on where the GOP should be headed.

Said senior Republican senator Sessions last July–

“The GOP lost the election—as exit polls clearly show—because it hemorrhaged support from middle- and low-income Americans of all backgrounds. In changing the terms of the immigration debate we will not only prevent the implementation of a disastrous policy, but begin a larger effort to broaden our appeal to working Americans of all backgrounds. Now is the time to speak directly to the real and legitimate concerns of millions of hurting Americans whose wages have declined and whose job prospects have grown only bleaker. This humble and honest populism—in contrast to the Administration’s cheap demagoguery—would open the ears of millions who have turned away from our party. Of course, such a clear and honest message would require saying ‘no’ to certain business demands and powerful interests who shaped the immigration bill in the Senate.” (Highlighting Forum’s)

We are now in high primary season, and all of us — conservative Republicans and conservative independents as well as Reagan Democrats – need to remind ourselves of the grave consequences for our country if the Big Immigration yearnings of the Republican Establishment prevail.

One useful way to get up to speed is to listen to Mark Krikorian and Phyllis Schlafly at 03:30 here where they detail these consequences in their “Amnesty and Open Borders: The End of America – and the GOP” last March 6 at the National Security Action Summit.

And scholar Heather MacDonald painted a grim picture yesterday in her Breitbart post “California: A View of America’s Immigration Future” here. 

We should all take the California case very seriously. As a former Californian, I know.

Virginia is not just a 2016 presidential battleground, but the scene of a current 2014 struggle for the future of the GOP. 

This state will hold two seriously contested GOP primaries: (Virginia 7) where the Republican primary favorite is chief  Republican Big Immigration panderer Eric Cantor; and Virginia 10 where the Republican primary favorite is Big Immigration follower *** Barbara Comstock.

Non-partisan NumbersUSA keeps the national books on the immigration records of our politicians.

Here, here, and here are NumbersUSA’s panels on Virginia House of Representatives primaries.

NumbersUSA reports on Virginia 10 that–

Howie Lind is the only one of the candidates to fill out a NumbersUSA candidate survey on immigration issues. The voters of the 10th District deserve to know where the other candidates stand. To see the survey click here. Questions in this survey are great examples of what you could submit for the Voter Town Hall.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

What Town Hall, some readers may ask?

Readers can find the details here on this Voter Town Hall to be held next Sunday afternoon at Patrick Henry College Gymnasium in Purcellville!

We can still undo much of the damage from health-care and health-insurance disasters like Obamacare. We can roll back industry-killing EPA regulations. We cannot, however, reverse nation-changing Big Immigration legislation with which the GOP Establishment is enamored.

This is why we must get all our GOP primary contenders to detail their positions on this grave concern. Vague phrases like “strengthening our border” simply won’t do the job.

* * * * * * * * * *

*     Mark Krikorian  Jeb’s Gibberish

**   Mark Krikorian  The Dog Ate My Visa!

***  See delegate and primary contender Bob Marshall here on Comstock donor Paul Singer — also a Big Immigration advocate.

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 05 Apr 2014

Immigration Folly: VA GOP Leadership Simply Leaves Reality!

Big Immigration Overlords of Virginia GOP?(Thanks to KnowYourMeme)

Big-Immigration Overlords of Virginia GOP?            (Thanks to The Simpsons via KnowYourMeme)

Greg Letiecq (Black Velvet Bruce Li)  has done citizens a great service with his post here “Ed Gillespie’s Opening Salvo For Open Borders.” 

Publisher Letiecq includes a YouTube here entitled “Shaun Kenney hosts Amnesty lobby 2 days after becoming RPV Executive Director.”

Concludes Letiecq here

“Make no mistake here, folks.  This was not some sort of last-minute, unannounced visit by the hyper-leftists who showed up and filmed with a covert camera.  This was a scheduled meeting, blessed by Ed Gillespie and the other establishment types pulling the strings at RPV in hopes they could convert the Republican Party of Virginia into a mindless let’s-destroy-America open-borders advocacy group.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

Not that anyone should have been surprised by the good Mr. Gillespie’s immigration position.

As we wrote last January 23 in our “Ed Gillespie: Would A Beltway Insider Be A Strong Voice For You?here

“Ed Gillespie has a long history of pushing immigration expansion.”

On February 17, 2009 we pointed to the favorite policy flavors here (scroll to bottom) of now-current-Senate hopeful Gillespie–

“He has a record of helping hike taxes [scroll to bottom]in Virginia, he has a strong record in behalf of more open immigration [scroll to bottom] and he is, according to the Manchester Union Leader, on record in behalf of larger government.

NRO editor-at-large John O’Sullivan last July 30 spelled out here the fundamental issue on Big Immigration in his “What about the Workers?”–

“In a letter to fellow-Republicans on the Hill today, Senator Jeff Sessions declares with admirable straightforwardness that the GOP establishment’s main argument for the Gang of Eight immigration bill — that ‘the great lesson of the 2012 election is that the GOP needs to push for immediate amnesty and a drastic surge in low-skill immigration’ — is quite simply ‘nonsense.’ He is, of course, correct. That is true, moreover, of every other argument advanced in favor of the bill by the Gang of Eight and the GOP establishment. All these arguments have been investigated to death, generally by Mark Krikorian on these pages, but also by a wide range of critics elsewhere, notably Mickey Kaus. I can’t think of a single one that has survived its vivisection — no, vivisection is performed on living things; the correct term for examining these arguments is post mortem. . . .  And as Mickey Kaus points out, its organizer, former Bush II commerce secretary Carlos Guterriez, more or less admits that this is a struggle between Republican donors and Republican voters. In fact it’s worse than that. This struggle pits a political coalition of the Republican and Democrat establishments versus blue-collar workers in both parties and of all ethnicities. And the electoral realities of such a struggle don’t favor the establishments.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

Why would any conservative want to give money to a Republican Party of Virginia while it remains under the domination of Big Immigration overlords?

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 03 Oct 2013

Voting for Amnesty? Conservatives Should Have a Heart-to-Heart Talk with Four VA GOP Members and Maryland’s Dr. Andy Harris

The Weekly Standard’s Maria Santos reported on Tuesday that “84 House Republicans Support Legalizing Undocumented Workers.”

Click here to see Santos’ take on each of the 84 plus 20 others (below) — including four Virginia GOP House members (Eric Cantor –see amnesty role here, Bob Goodlatte, Randy Forbes and Frank Wolf)  and one from Maryland (Dr. Andy Harris) — as well as Santos’ entire post where she also notes–

20 others have said they would be willing to consider it—many more than what most media reports suggest.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

Breitbart’s Tony Lee explains here in his “Report: At Least 104 House Republicans Considering Pathway to Legalization for Illegals” that–

“Other House Republicans have reportedly expressed an interest in giving illegal immigrants a pathway to a green card, which would fall short of citizenship. Others are speaking of ‘earned legalization’ or ‘reconciliation’ as House Republicans work on immigration legislation beneath the radar’ while the country is focused on Obamacare, the government shutdown and the debate over raising the debt ceiling.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

Last Friday Grant Newman (NumbersUSA) warned us here to “BEWARE: House ‘border bill’ weakens current law”–

“Assuming the Administration decides that this is one of the immigration laws it will actually follow, we would be left with weakened border security requirements and a couple of plans that may or may not ever lead to real border security.
Worse yet, H.R. 1417 will likely be a vessel for a conference with the Schumer-Obama amnesty.”(Highlighting in original.)

Certainly, Obamacare is a menace now upon us and must be defanged.

And, as we have written (scroll down here), there is big money behind big amnesty.

But the amnesty bills, once enacted, are irreversible

Laura Ingraham sums it up here

“We will not be distracted. No matter how often John McCain and Eric Cantor criticize the Obama Administration over the IRS scandal or Benghazi, or how many times Paul Ryan calls for serious entitlement reform, or how many filibusters are led by Mitch McConnell. If they want our support in 2014, then they have to come through for us on immigration — period. Immigration is the Obama Administration’s top priority, and if handled badly by Republicans, it will give the Democrats a permanent working majority.
If the Republicans can’t get this right, then there is little reason for conservatives to keep voting Republican.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 28 Jan 2013

UPDATED! Beltway GOP: Amnesty Is This Week’s Bipartisan Betrayal

UPDATES JANUARY 30! 
  • “A Pointless Amnesty” (NRO Editors) “Rather than getting their heads handed to them in yet another grand bargain, Republicans should push for piecemeal reform through focused, narrow legislation.”
  • “Bipartisan group of House members are crafting their own immigration plan” reports AP via Washington Post. “‘The immigration issue, it’s time to deal with it. I said it the day after the election, I meant it. We’re going to have to deal with it,’ House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said last week while answering audience questions after a speech at the Ripon Society, a Republican public policy organization in Washington. Boehner went on to mention the bipartisan working group, which until then was little known, adding he hadn’t seen details. ‘My theory was if these folks could work this out, it would be a big step in the right direction, so I would think you’re likely to hear a lot more on immigration reform on the House side soon,’ he said.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
UPDATES JANUARY 29! 
  • Andrew McCarthy deconstructs (Ordered Liberty) “Senator Rubio’s Immigration Enforcement Fantasy.” McCarthy explains  “[t]he Republicans pushing the deal tout its illusory enforcement measures, but even if these were real lawmakers are not in a position to compel the president to execute them.”
  • Heather MacDonald declares (NRO) “…[T]he proposal is tantamount to an immediate, unconditional amnesty, and thus will lead to the same moral hazard — attracting further illegal immigration — as every previous amnesty in the U.S. and Europe. Nothing of consequence to an intending illegal alien distinguishes the ‘probationary status’ that will be granted upon payment of a fine and back taxes from full-fledged legal status.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
  • Mark Krikorian notes (NRO) “At Monday’s press conference where the Gang of Eight unveiled its amnesty outline, Senator McCain had this to say about the origins of the package being presented (see about minute 31): ‘And if we do succeed, and I think we will, it will be a testimonial to Ted Kennedy’s effort years ago that laid the groundwork for this agreement. You will find that this agreement has very little difference from that of the legislation that was led by Senator Kennedy some years ago.’ Has McCain been in the Senate bubble so long that he doesn’t recognize this as a strong reason for voting against his preferred measure? In any case, I think when they finally write a bill they should act on McCain’s suggestion and name it the Ted Kennedy Testimonial Immigration Act of 2013.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

**********************************************************************

Beltway GOP: Amnesty Is This Week’s Bipartisan Betrayal

How quickly the GOP Establishment forgets the grassroots pushback against amnesty during the Bush Administration!

Here is the American Conservative Union’s Al Cardenas setting today’s Beltway tone–

“It seems that a growing number of Democrats & Republicans in Congress have found common ground on agreed-upon principles for immigration reform.
Congratulations to both sides of the aisle in forging a responsible framework today. Difficult days lay ahead in working out specifics on the legislation itself, but the Senate is off to a good start and I encourage the House to follow suit.
As a result of the White House Executive Orders last year, we now have a defacto amnesty status which can only be fixed through legislation. We will soon know whether President Obama is more interested in finding solutions to our nation’s immigration challenges or yet another opportunity for political grand standing and ‘gotcha’ politics. The conservative movement stands ready to support reasonable immigration reform.
But, the President’s speech tomorrow will hopefully address more than just fixing our immigration challenges. It is my hope that he is ready to responsibly compromise on solutions to our nation’s many crises. The ball is now in President Obama’s court.”

Faithful readers will recall the devastating 2007 Heritage Foundation studies of the heavy costs of low-skilled immigration of which Robert Rector’s “Amnesty Will Cost U.S. Taxpayers at Least $2.6 Trillion” (click here) is the most salient.

While we don’t know the details of the Senate ‘bi-partisan’ package or the Obama Administration proposal expected tomorrow, the 2007 Heritage study sets the basic fiscal stage.

Warns NumbersUSA of “Amnesty 2.0” –

“While the current proposal is short on details, Rosemary Jenks has reviewed it and tells me it is basically the same sweeping amnesty we defeated in 2007 with ‘updated’ language to re-brand the amnesty.
We had hoped that the new voices of Senators Rubio (R-FL) and Lee (R-UT) [both members of the so-called Senate ‘Gang of Eight’] would bring some new perspective to an immigration proposal so we were especially disappointed to see their Amnesty 2.0 proposal be nothing more than a rehash of the failed 2007 amnesty.
Indications are that many in the House are posed to embrace the Gang of Eight’s proposal or President Obama’s proposal too. This morning Rep. Diaz Balart (R-FL) and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) told CNN the only question left is how to accomplish the ‘path to citizenship.’
It’s hard to imagine a more wide-sweeping amnesty than the proposal the Gang of Eight has outlined. AgJOBS and the DREAM Act would be effective immediately. While other illegal aliens would have to get in line behind those waiting legally for a green card, they will eventually receive a green card. Legal status, jobs and other benefits will be available almost immediately. Virtually every illegal alien in the United States would benefit from Amnesty 2.0.”

Immigration expert Mark Krikorian (CIS) today reveals

“Even amnesty advocates acknowledge that the enforcement provisions of any package deal are bogus.”

and explains

“This latest iteration of the decade-old amnesty con contains the same old ‘back of the line’ baloney as its predecessors. In other words, illegal immigrants will supposedly not be able to cut ahead of those who didn’t break the law. But, of course, that’s nonsense, because the only line they might have to wait in is the line for an actual green card. They will receive nominally provisional immigration status as soon as they submit an application — and with that the right to get a work card, a Social Security number (to replace the one they stole from a legal resident), and a driver’s license. Once they have that, what difference would a green card make?”

Last Friday, author Krikorian detailed “Jeb’s Tyranny of Immigration Cliches” providing a key to the Orwellian speech of amnesty advocates.

Daniel Horowitz (MadisonProject) today outlines an immigration proposal that might be worth more than a “bucket of spit”–

“Any so-called comprehensive immigration reform proposal that is worth more than a bucket of spit must ensure the following:
  • we are not saddled with 12 million new consumers of the welfare state;
  • we don’t have 12 million new Democrat voters;
  • those receiving the amnesty will not have the ability to spawn chain migration;
  • before any amnesty is implemented, there is a complete establishment of visa tracking, border control, and mandatory E-verify to ensure that this won’t create another ‘Charlie Brown with the football’ scenario of more waves of illegal immigration;
  • our legal immigration system move towards a merit-based process that favors high-skill immigrants instead of the current ‘Kennedy’ system that is random and tendentious towards low-skilled immigrants.”

What is behind the GOP Establishment rush to amnesty? 

We suggest two reasons to start with–

  • Heavy donor backing. 

As we wrote last November – -

“Mark Krikorian [had] the most revealing report about the goals of the GOP Establishment and immigration –

A comment by Haley Barbour at the recent Republican Governors Association conference shone light on the GOP establishment’s view that the point of mass immigration, legal or not, is to provide cheap labor inputs for industry:
‘Col. Sanders needs these guys,’ Barbour said, referring to the Latinos in Mississippi who work at processing plants.
So that’s why we have immigration? To procure compliant, disposable, low-cost staff for big employers, now that the old method for doing that has been banned by the 13th amendment? Un-effing-believable.
Teddy Roosevelt got a lot of stuff wrong, what with that Progressive baloney and wanting to acquire colonies, but he certainly got this right:
Never under any condition should this Nation look at an immigrant as primarily a labor unit. He should always be looked at primarily as a future citizen and the father of other citizens who are to live in this land as fellows with our children and our children’s children.’” (Highlighting Forum’s.)”
  • The unfinished ‘legacy’ of the Bush Dynasty. One must not underrate the influence of Bush Administration apparatchiks in today’s Beltway GOP circles.  Of course, Jeb Bush is exhibit A.  But don’t forget Grover Norquist’s commitment to amnesty.

The permanent damage from the enactment of a major amnesty bill will be widespread: not just fiscal damage but societal (additional loss of jobs for many American citizens) and the end of the American Way (an officially bi-lingual society and likely the end of assimilation, of transmitting a heritage of individual liberty and private property and patriotism — we are hardly doing that even today in our schools) as well as grave dangers in public-safety and national security.

We defeated this threat to our land during the Bush Administration.

Will we — the grassroots, the country class, the yeoman class — be able to get our objections across to members of the Congress once more?

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 29 Nov 2012

Ex-Romney Rainmaker Peddles Big-Time Immigration To GOP

Last Tuesday, Daniel Horowitz (MadisonProject) commented about a Politico post announcing a super PAC “Republicans for Immigration Reform” 

“On the surface, this is nothing new.  There are plenty of Republicans who are running scared and are of the opinion that support for half-baked amnesty will somehow win over the Hispanic vote in a bidding war.  However, what is new here is the fact that the man who ran ads bashing Rick Perry on immigration in the primary is now starting a group that is advocating more amnesty than Perry ever supported.

We’ve seen this pattern on numerous occasions.  Moderate Republicans find ways to surreptitiously get to the right of their more conservative competitors in the primaries, while dropping those views as soon as they become inconvenient.  This is what we’re up against with the Republican consultant class.  It’s all scheming and gaming; there are no core beliefs with these people.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

We differ slightly with analyst Horowitz. We believe the consultant class generally reflects the Beltway Perspective of the social sea in which they swim.  In this sense, they may possibly have ‘core’ beliefs. Of course, many take care not to let any such beliefs get in the way of day-to-day election tactics.

According to the Politico Influence (PI) column (scroll down in preceding link)

“Charlie Spies, who helped launch pro-Mitt Romney super PAC Restore Our Future and served as Romney’s 2008 campaign general counsel, tells PI that Republicans for Immigration Reform — a newly filed super PAC for which he’s serving as treasurer — has big plans for the next couple of years.

‘It is a super PAC that will support pro-comprehensive immigration reform Republicans, including in primary elections when they are attacked for supporting comprehensive immigration reform,’ Spies wrote in an email to PI, noting that the group, which formally filed federal organizational documents last week, hasn’t yet established firm fundraising goals.

Former Bush administration Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez is leading the group ‘and it is still in the formation stage,’ Spies said. ‘The group will provide support to Republican leaders — like Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Speaker [John] Boehner — who work for a comprehensive solution that can put Republicans back on offense with the immigration issue.’”(Bolding in original)

 Jim Robb (NumbersUSA) warned in a money-raising email today –

“They have teamed up to form a new super-PAC to try to buy lawmakers’ support for amnesty. The good news is that most of our allies in both parties in Congress won re-election and you can influence them to reject the bait.

Washington lawyer Charlie Spies raised over $100 million for Mitt Romney in the last election. He’s working with former Bush [Commerce] Secretary Carlos Gutierrez to target our allies in Congress! Together, they intend to convince Republicans that the way to start winning elections is by selling out the American public and granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.

‘This is not small ball,’ Gutierrez said. ‘We’re serious, and we are going to push the debates on immigration reform to a place where I believe the Republican Party should be in the 21st century.’”

Does anyone believe that these moves would not be underway even if governor Romney had won?

Didn’t someone say that conservatives were in an abusive relationship with the national GOP?

Homeland Defense &Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 16 Oct 2012

We Can Fight Tax Hikes Without All Grover’s Baggage

Herd-think, great discomfort with standing apart (which might  lead to a possible exclusion from today’s ‘smart set’), and a concern over financial support or penalties  (scroll down in foregoing link for GOP Establishment examples), are all equal-opportunity vices.  Democrats and their base, Republicans and their Beltway Establishment, and the conservative blogosphere —  all have to be alert to these sometimes subtle barriers to forthright expression.

Do some of these vulnerabilities, for example, explain the continuing failure to spotlight — by too many who sail under the conservative flag –Grover Norquist’s Islamist leanings in particular, as well as his high-immigration advocacy, minimalist defense position, and questionable values posture? 

Nonetheless Frank Gaffney and his analysts, and David Horowitz here and here have consistently belled the Norquist cat on his Islamist record.

Norquist Talks Up Immigration in Indiana

Grover Norquist declared (go to video inside foregoing link) last Friday at an Indiana conference —

“[Immigration] is the most important thing to focus on if you are concerned about the future of the country both as an economic power and as a serious leader of the world and simply as a successful society.”

One wonders what Mr. Norquist’s measures are for a ‘successful society.’

ATR chief Norquist deplored what he called immigration “restrictionists.” He claimed “reasonable, inclusive, comprehensive, immigration reform” makes “good politics.” Listen to his talk right here.

“Mass Immigration” vs. “A Conservative, Low-Tax Agenda”

Last April Jon Feere of the Center for Immigration Studies wrote in “The Alleged Costs of Ending Universal Birthright Citizenship” –

“Anti-tax Grover Norquist helped release the [‘The Cost to Americans and America of Ending Birthright Citizenship’] report , apparently thinking that mass immigration somehow benefits a conservative, low-taxation agenda when it does not. See ‘The High Cost of Cheap Labor: Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget,’ ‘Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children: A Look at Cash, Medicaid, Housing, and Food Program”, and “Illegal Immigrants Receive Billions of Dollars More from the IRS than They Pay in.’” (Highlighting Forum’s.)

Of GOP members of the Congress, Virginia’s Frank Wolf is notable here for calling Mr. Norquist out on his Islamist friends.

Stay tuned for more on the Norquist Wing of the GOP.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Some of our related posts — click on ‘hot links’ below:

UPDATED! What Will Your Score Be On The Grover Norquist Quiz?
Representative Frank Wolf Bells the Grover Norquist Cat
Would Paul Weyrich Have Muzzled Outspoken Shariah Critics?
Norquist’s Network & Iran: Another Heads-Up for the GOP?
Who’s Afraid of Grover? How Many Eminent Conservatives?

 

 


 

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 28 Mar 2012

Updated!MD GOP Senate Primary: Getting Specific on Immigration!

UPDATE JUST AFTER PRESS TIME WEDNESDAY EVENING! Dan Bongino calls, and his campaign manager Jim Gibbons emails – –  “Amnesty: Dan does not support amnesty of any form for those who violate our laws. E-Verify: Dan strongly supports mandatory nationwide implementation of E-Verify. DREAM Act: Dan signed the repeal petition and does not support subsidizing illegal behavior.” We are delighted to get both Maryland GOP Senate candidates’ specific positions on these key issues!

In next Tuesday’s Maryland primary election, Daniel Bongino and Richard Douglas are the principal contenders for the GOP U.S. Senate nomination to run against long-time Congressional incumbent and now senator Ben Cardin.

In campaign contributions with over $188,000 collected with about $179,000 from 182 individual contributions, Mr. Bongino leads Mr. Douglas. Former submariner Douglas has collected about $132,000, with over $26,000 from 22 individual contributions.

In Democrat campaign contributions, senator Ben Cardin has collected about $3.8 million of which $2.3 million are from 2,366 individual contributions.

Cook’s Political Report (go to “dashboard” then “senate” and move across the bar to “8” in foregoing link) rates the Cardin Senate race as “Solid D” meaning solid Democrat.

Of course the GOP Senate nominee may triumph over these apparently daunting odds.  In any event, whoever of the two GOP contenders is the party’s nominee will likely run a hard-fought and visible general election campaign helping set the future tone of the Maryland Republican Party.

Mr. Douglas is airing ads attacking senator Cardin’s record, and Mr. Bongino by virtue of his previous life as a member of the Secret Service has become something of a celebrity.

All of which is why the respective positions of these two candidates on immigration are so important in a “sanctuary state” for illegals like Maryland.

Moreover last year an historic combination of Republicans, independents, and Democrats were able to petition SB167 — the so-called Maryland Dream Act — to referendum.

NumbersUSA keeps score nationally and on a non-partisan basis of the position of candidates on pending major immigration issues.

Here is their take right now on Maryland U.S. Senate candidates.

As we asked in our post of March 11 “Immigration: Where Do Our GOP Congressional Candidates Stand?”  –

“Will two leading Maryland Republican candidates for the United States Senate, Daniel Bongino and Richard Douglas, take a position on amnesty?

Click here, scroll right, look at both their responses to [NumbersUSA] question one (‘unknown’).

Will they take a position on mandatory e-verify? Click here, scroll right, look at both their responses to [NumbersUSA] question three (‘unknown’).”

Only three Maryland U.S. Senate candidates, two Democrats and one Republican, got the highest NumbersUSA score – “True Reformer.” But  none of the three are likely to get their respective party’s nomination.

We are focusing on two of the crucial twelve issues that NumbersUSA enumerates – opposing amnesty and supporting e-verify.  We added one of our own — supporting the repeal of the Maryland Dream Act next November in the general election.

Mr. Douglas emailed us his answers on March 12 —

“Amnesty:  I oppose alien amnesty, and am also opposed to amnesties which protect American citizens who hire unlawful entrants, patronize their unregulated businesses, or use illegal drugs smuggled into our country.  All, equally, are threats to US border security.

E-Verify:  Upon my return from Iraq deployment in 2007, I was obliged to stop, identify myself properly, and satisfy US Customs and Border Protection officers at a BWI Airport checkpoint that I was lawfully entitled to enter the United States.  I support E-Verify and other reasonable measures to preserve American jobs for U.S. citizens and lawful permanent resident aliens.  Such measures must be applied competently and sparingly in order to impose the lightest possible burden on Americans.

Maryland ‘Dream’ Act:  The people of Maryland have spoken, and this statute will be put to a vote on the November ballot.  Voting on important issues is fundamentally a good thing.  The Dream Act petition drive enjoyed wide bipartisan support because the majority of Marylanders cherish the rule of law.  Moreover, Maryland simply cannot afford to reduce income at a time when the state’s fiscal condition is critical.  The state budget has grown from $29 billion, the day Martin O’Malley took office, to $36 billion today.  There is no end to the tax increases under consideration in Annapolis, and no end to the O’Malley/Cardin crusade to create bigger and more costly government.  Finally, the Dream Act sent precisely the wrong message at an hour when our nation’s borders are less secure than ever.  It is proper that Marylanders will have their say about the Dream Act in November.  In fact, this ballot initiative is the essence of democracy.  It should be welcomed by all Marylanders on all sides of the issue.”

Yesterday morning we wrote Mr. Bongino’s press aide about these three issues –

Here is [the NumbersUSA] take right now on Maryland U.S. Senate candidates.

  • Does the foregoing link present an accurate picture today of Mr. Bongino’s positions on the twelve issues NumbersUSA enumerates? For example, Mr. Bongino is shown as apparently not responding to the ‘oppose amnesty’ question.
  • Does Mr. Bongino support or oppose the so-called Maryland Dream Act (SB167) which will be on next November’s ballot?
  • Does Mr. Bongino support or oppose the current e-verify proposal HB82 “State Government – E-Verify Program” in the Maryland House of Delegates?”

To date we have no response so we must conclude that Mr. Bongino’s current website position and current responses to NumbersUSA constitute his entire stance on immigration.

Mr. Bongino shows exceptional vigor and presence in his campaign, and Mr. Douglas brings a world of experience through his candidacy.

But GOP voters should press Mr. Bongino for specific immigration positions before next Tuesday’s primary – just as Mr. Douglas has given the voters. [See update at top of post!]

This is too important a national issue for smooth campaign talk, and too important for the many Marylanders opposed to the Dream Act.

***************
For a more in-depth discussion of the underlying immigration issues,  see our  “Immigration: Where Do Our GOP Congressional Candidates Stand?”

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 11 Mar 2012

Immigration: Where Do Our GOP Congressional Candidates Stand?

UPDATE MARCH 14! Read here NumbersUSA post “Ask House Majority Leader Eric Cantor to Stand Up for E-Verify and Unemployed Virginians”  – – then scroll to bottom to read Maryland United States Senate candidate Richard Douglas’ positions on amnesty, e-verify, and the Maryland “Dream Act.”

***************

Why is Speaker Boehner Blocking E-Verify? – YouTube

In our view, there are few issues that separate what Angelo Codevilla calls our ‘ruling class’ and our ‘country class’ more than that of immigration.

We might call professor Codevilla’s ‘ruling class’ Republicans the ‘Beltway GOP’ or the ‘GOP Establishment.’ ‘Country class’ Republicans, then, are the conservative base including Tea Partiers.

Codevilla explains

“Moreover, 2009-10 establishment Republicans sought only to modify the government’s agenda while showing eagerness to join the Democrats in new grand schemes, if only they were allowed to. Sen. Orrin Hatch continued dreaming of being Ted Kennedy, while Lindsey Graham set aside what is true or false about ‘global warming’ for the sake of getting on the right side of history. No prominent Republican challenged the ruling class’s continued claim of superior insight, nor its denigration of the American people as irritable children who must learn their place. The Republican Party did not disparage the ruling class, because most of its officials are or would like to be part of it.” (Underscoring Forum’s.)

Polls Show Immigration-Position Contrasts Between Leaders and Rank-And-File.

Here and here are polls by the Center for Immigration Studies showing respectively widely different views on immigration between mainline clergy and the laity, and between business and labor ‘leaders vs. rank and file.’

“A new Zogby poll [February 2010] of senior executives, business owners, and members of union households finds that each of these groups thinks the best way to deal with illegal immigrants in the country is to enforce the law and cause them to return home. This is in stark contrast to lobbyists for large companies, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which argue for legalization. The findings of the survey are consistent with surveys done by the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents small enterprises, showing strong opposition to legalization. Among unions, the leadership strongly supports legalizing illegal immigrants, but the survey shows enforcement — not legalization — is by far the option favored by union members and their families.”

Keeping Score on Immigration Specifics.

Let’s look at Maryland Republican Congressional candidates on immigration as the April 3 primary approaches.

The fiercely non-partisan NumbersUSA keeps score on specific immigration issues leaving candidates of both parties little wiggle room.

Here is NumbersUSA’s most recent take on Maryland candidates for the Congress.

Here is their take on just the Maryland U.S. Senate candidates.

As readers know, Maryland has become a ‘sanctuary state’ for illegal aliens.

On the other hand, the successful petitioning to referendum of the Maryland version of the Dream Act signaled widespread and bi-partisan opposition to subsidizing illegal aliens in the Old Line State’s institutions of higher education.

Illegal immigration is a major fiscal issue, an assimilation issue, and a security issue.

Before the April 3 Maryland primary, readers should ask those GOP candidates who have not fully responded to the NumbersUSA questionnaire exactly where they stand on the key immigration issues listed here.

“1.) Oppose Amnesty? Do you OPPOSE offering the officially estimated 11 million people illegally in the U.S. a path to U.S. citizenship and/or long-term work permits (whether through a blanket amnesty or an ‘earned legalization’ or other form)?

2.) Support Attrition Through Enforcement? Do you support Attrition Through Enforcement (denying public benefits, turning off the jobs magnet and enforcing existing laws) as the primary way to deal with the existing illegal population, causing illegal aliens to self-repatriate back to their home countries over time?

3.) Support Mandatory E-Verify? Should jobs held by illegal aliens be opened up for unemployed Americans and legal immigrants already here by (a) requiring all employers to use the federal automated, rapid-response internet system (E-Verify) to screen out illegal foreign workers, and (b) by setting up systems to identify and fire existing employees who used fraudulent and stolen identities to obtain jobs?

4.) Support Local Enforcement? Should the federal government be required to cooperate with local officials, including picking up all illegal aliens detained locally and training law enforcement agencies waiting in line for the 287(g) and other programs designed for local governments to assist federal immigration enforcement?

5.) Oppose Sanctuary Policies & Other Incentives? Should Congress reduce funding to state and local governments that adopt sanctuary, in-state tuition, and/or other policies that give incentives to illegal aliens?

6.) Support Completion of US-VISIT? Should Congress fully fund the completion of the entry/exit system at all borders and points of entry in which every person entering and leaving the U.S. is logged into a database which would notify law enforcement, businesses and others when a foreign tourist, student, worker or other fails to leave on-time? *(US-VISIT was approved by Congress in 1996, has never been sufficiently funded and is largely incomplete.)

7.) Support Border Security? Should Congress fund and provide oversight for the full implementation of border security measures already signed into law?

8.) Oppose Birthright Citizenship? Should Congress move the U.S. in line with most other nations and stop the policy of giving automatic citizenship at birth to children when both parents are illegal aliens, tourists, or other visitors?

9.) Oppose Chain Migration? Should Congress implement the bi-partisan, national Jordan Commission recommendation to limit family-based immigration to the nuclear family of spouse and minor children, thus eliminating the ‘chain migration’ categories of extended family that are the key reason immigration has quadrupled since the 1960s?

10.) Oppose Visa Lottery? Should Congress stop using a lottery to give away permanent green cards to 50,000 randomly chosen foreign citizens each year (an elimination suggested by the Jordan Commission)?

11.) Oppose Unnecessary Worker Importation? Should Congress institute safeguards that will prevent importation of foreign workers (particularly on permanent visas) if their presence would threaten the jobs or depress the wages of American workers?

12.) Support a Reduction in Total Immigration? Until 1976, U.S. immigration traditionally was an average of around 250,000 a year; since new legislation in 1990, it has averaged 1,000,000 a year. More than 40 million foreign-born now live and work in the U.S. At current rates, immigration will add more than 100 million additional people to the U.S. population by 2060. This government-forced rapid population expansion will require huge increases in energy and in government expenditures for roads, bridges, sewage treatment, schools, and other infrastructure and services. Polling finds that most Americans in every region of the country believe this immigration-driven population growth will harm their quality of life. Do you favor reducing overall immigration numbers toward the traditional levels?” (Underscoring Forum’s throughout.)

As Ann Coulter warned last December – -

“But capitulate on illegal immigration, and the entire country will have the electorate of California. There will be no turning back.”

Will two leading Maryland Republican candidates for the United States Senate, Daniel Bongino and Richard Douglas, take a position on amnesty? Click here, scroll right, look at both their responses to question one (‘unknown’).

Will they take a position on mandatory e-verify? Click here, scroll right, look at both their responses to question three (‘unknown’).

Mr. Bongino shows exceptional vigor and presence in his campaign, and Mr. Douglas brings a world of experience through his candidacy.  But supporters should press them for clear and specific immigration positions before the April 3 primary.

This is too important a national issue for fast campaign talk, and too important for the many Marylanders opposed to the Dream Act.

(Readers who wish to look more deeply into the fiscal or social costs of illegal (or of unrestricted legal) immigration can learn much from Mark Krikorian here, Heather MacDonald here, and Robert Rector here. The widely unrecognized problems here of the US Refugee Admissions Program can be tracked through Ann Corcoran’s Refugee Resettlement Watch here. And here (scroll down) is Mark Kirkorian’s 2010 post on “Why are the state think tanks generally so bad on immigration, when they address it at all?”)

**************

UPDATE MARCH 12! U. S. Senate candidate Richard Douglas declared today – – “No other candidate in Maryland’s US Senate race, including incumbent Ben Cardin, has more immigration, visa, nationality, and border security experience than I do.  I have lived and worked in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, in the mid-1980s as a US Foreign Service officer.  In the US Senate in the wake of 9/11, I influenced drafting of visa-related provisions of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.  My experience as an immigration and nationality lawyer led to becoming recognized as a Maryland expert in the field.

Amnesty:  I oppose alien amnesty, and am also opposed to amnesties which protect American citizens who hire unlawful entrants, patronize their unregulated businesses, or use illegal drugs smuggled into our country.  All, equally, are threats to US border security.

E-Verify:  Upon my return from Iraq deployment in 2007, I was obliged to stop, identify myself properly, and satisfy US Customs and Border Protection officers at a BWI Airport checkpoint that I was lawfully entitled to enter the United States.  I support E-Verify and other reasonable measures to preserve American jobs for U.S. citizens and lawful permanent resident aliens.  Such measures must be applied competently and sparingly in order to impose the lightest possible burden on Americans.

Maryland ‘Dream’ Act:  The people of Maryland have spoken, and this statute will be put to a vote on the November ballot.  Voting on important issues is fundamentally a good thing.  The Dream Act petition drive enjoyed wide bipartisan support because the majority of Marylanders cherish the rule of law.  Moreover, Maryland simply cannot afford to reduce income at a time when the state’s fiscal condition is critical.  The state budget has grown from $29 billion, the day Martin O’Malley took office, to $36 billion today.  There is no end to the tax increases under consideration in Annapolis, and no end to the O’Malley/Cardin crusade to create bigger and more costly government.  Finally, the Dream Act sent precisely the wrong message at an hour when our nation’s borders are less secure than ever.  It is proper that Marylanders will have their say about the Dream Act in November.  In fact, this ballot initiative is the essence of democracy.  It should be welcomed by all Marylanders on all sides of the issue.”

This post has been revised since March 12 to include material on Virginia incumbent and House Majority leader Eric Cantor.

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 02 Mar 2012

NumbersUSA: House GOP Leaders Planning Amnesty Now?

In a video late this week here “Webcast Singles Out the Enemies of E-Verify”, Numbers USA chief Roy Beck addressed the apparently puzzling opposition of the three top House GOP leaders to mandating that employers use the widely popular e-verify approach (click on the foregoing link to Mark Krikorian).

Chief House e-verify sponsor and judiciary panel chairman Lamar Smith says “E-Verify is a successful program to help ensure that jobs are reserved for citizens and legal workers.”

Beck revealed (go to 24:58 in the webcast) —

“Our intel on the Hill [is] that Republican leaders in Congress right now are working behind the scenes with some of the biggest leaders of the amnesty [bloc] . . . to pass some kind of amnesty this year.”

Citing a Tuesday report by Timm Herdt “Has the California GOP hit bottom?” (Ventura Star) on House majority whip Kevin McCarthy

“[McCarthy] also acknowledged that the party ‘has a long way to go’ if it hopes to attract a respectable share of the Latino vote. One major obstacle has been the state GOP’s hard-line opposition to a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants who have lived and worked in the state for years.”

“‘The party’s going to have to find a way to address this issue,’ he said.”

But NumbersUSA Roy Beck declared

“What we now know from this story is that Kevin McCarthy, number three Republican in the U. S. House, is part of the pro-amnesty bloc.”

For those souls who understandably hope the House GOP leadership and the conservative base are singing from the same hymnal, we invite their attention to Mr. Herdt’s observation

“At the same time, McCarthy knows that the party must always address the concerns of its far-right base. In an interview with The New York Times Magazine last year, McCarthy referred to mostly symbolic votes in the House to defund National Public Radio and on various abortion restrictions as exercises in ‘feeding the alligators.’”

No matter which GOP figure gets the nomination for president, conservatives must not lose focus on getting principled GOP leadership in the next Congress.

We must do this to prevent — or reverse — or both — an appalling “transformation” of our Republic.

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 07 Dec 2011

“Dream Act”: Maryland Petition Gains Legal Victory

Judicial Watch today declares in their press release  “Illegal Alien Activists End Challenge to ‘Sufficiency and Number’ of [Petition Signatures] to Put Maryland DREAM Act to Voter Referendum” – -

“Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today announced developments in the MDPetitions.com legal action over whether Maryland voters will have the opportunity to directly consider ‘tuition benefits’ for illegal alien students. Pursuant to a Joint Stipulation signed on December 5, 2011, Casa de Maryland and illegal alien activist plaintiffs will no longer challenge the ‘sufficiency and number of the petition signatures’ collected by MDPetitions.com to place the repeal of the illegal alien tuition benefits policy on the November, 2012 Maryland ballot. The plaintiffs will continue to maintain that the Maryland DREAM Act cannot legally be subject to referendum.” (Underscoring Forum’s.)

Read the entire Judicial Watch release here.

In a related development, just last month the Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky and Charles Stimson published an illuminating legal memorandum “Providing In-State Tuition for Illegal Aliens: A Violation of Federal Law.”

The two lawyers report:

“Federal law prohibits state colleges and universities from providing in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens ‘on the basis of residence within the State’—unless the same in-state rates are offered to all citizens of the United States. Today, 12 states are circumventing this federal law, and the legal arguments offered to justify such actions are untenable, no matter what other policy arguments are offered in their defense.”

We may have missed it, but we have not seen support for the petition to referendum effort among major Maryland business organizations. (Scroll down here.) Moreover the House of Delegates GOP leadership had reportedly not expected the petition to referendum on SB167 to prevail among the voters.

The petition drive’s success arises from the hands-on leadership of freshman delegate Neil Parrott and the groundwork laid over the years by veteran delegate Pat McDonough.

Next Page »