Feed on Posts or Comments 22 January 2018

Illegal Immigration Richard Falknor on 11 Mar 2012 06:58 pm

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.

Comments are closed.

Trackback This Post |