From our Great Plains Command Post comes the forward of this article from the AP via the Boston Globe: Dems pin immigration hopes on GOP’s Ryan. You read that correctly, the Democrats pin their hopes on Paul Ryan. That is worrisome to say the least. Democrat leadership cannot be trusted and we have little faith in the Republican establishment. Reading the article:
Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman who is frequently mentioned in the GOP lineup of possible 2016 presidential candidates, stands apart from many fellow House Republicans in favoring a way out of the shadows for the 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. in violation of the law.
He (Ryan) casts sweeping overhaul as a necessity to ensure both economic and national security — a fitting argument for an acolyte of Jack Kemp, the late Republican congressman and 1996 vice presidential candidate who backed an ill-fated effort in 2006 to overhaul the immigration system.
‘‘Paul Ryan says we cannot have a permanent underclass of Americans, that there needs to be a pathway to citizenship,’’ says Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., who has been working relentlessly on immigration legislation. ‘‘He is my guiding light. I know I get him in trouble every time I say it.’’
Yeah Lu, I would say so. But Ryan invoking Jack Kemp with regards to immigration when the specifics of a House bill are not known is irksome. I was a Kemp organizer in 1988. One of the reasons I supported him was because of his hope growth and opportunity theme and devotion to a “rising tide raising all boats,” which he adopted from John F. Kennedy. He cautioned against being fearful of vibrant legal immigration. But what was understood about the legal and illegal aspects to the immigration issue then and the implications, welfare costs and other data we have now are far removed.
Eight years later Kemp was the VP nominee for the Dole presidential ticket ( I supported Phil Gramm in the Iowa Caucuses). But a full picture of the illegal immigration problem had still not gelled in national politics.
However looking at a contemporaneous (1996) analysis of Kemp’s views on immigration by Stuart Anderson, writing for the CATO Institute, we see that Kemp did not believe in welfare for illegal immigrants. I would add that in spite of any nuances Kemp had then as regards education accommodations for the children of illegal immigrants, (which we have seen abuses US taxpayers) any implication that he would have supported what amounts to waving a wand and declaring illegal adults legal, a.k.a.” regularizing them,” would be a perverted metamorphosis of his basic position. Either that or Kemp was a pathetic panderer and prevaricator. I do not think he was. Does Paul Ryan who says Kemp is his inspiration on this issue think so? Here is part of Anderson’s analysis of Kemp’s position on legal / illegal immigration:
Neither Kemp nor Bennett supports welfare for legal or illegal immigrants. This year they wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “First and foremost, we should prohibit illegal immigrants from receiving welfare. For legal immigrants, we ought to both limit the classes of legal aliens eligible for government benefits and restrict the type of benefits they can obtain.” They argued that “the ultimate solution is to truly end welfare as we know it for native and foreign-born alike.” . . .
Kemp’s views on immigration are the same as those expressed by Ronald Reagan. . . . Kemp and Reagan have both supported a reasonable level of legal immigration within our closely regulated system that limits lawful entry essentially to refugees, close family members and company-sponsored immigrants. Yet, like most Americans, both have supported measures to control illegal immigration that do not impinge on our civil liberties.
The facts of any bill matter, not sentiment or conservative intentions. Loopholes matter. A politician advocating immigration reform when the selling points involve unenforceable window dressing to provide temporary political cover is not something I will abide by. The honest solution is simple enough. True immigration reform would be enforcing the laws on the books requiring border control and as regards matters directly influencing the illegal influx. Abiding by the law would be a reformation.
If Paul Ryan has a plan to implement those aspects of Kemp’s position then he should be railing against the phoniness of the Senate plan. Mostly we have no confidence he is even on Kemp’s wavelength and even if he is, is not up to the task of negotiating with Democrats in the best interests of American taxpayers on the issue.
We prefer the simple basic approach of Tom Cotton (R) of Arkansas who has emerged as an articulate spokesman in the House for American taxpayers on the issue. He shows less naivete then we have heard expressed by Paul Ryan. Read about his views here.
Cottons concerns about providing legal status to illegal immigrants rightly extends to the “DREAMers,” the young people who have grown up in the United States after being brought here by their parents.
“We’d have to know that we aren’t encouraging the next wave of illegal immigration,” he said. “If you’re a mom or dad and you see the opportunity that has been provided to someone else’s child who took them to the United States illegally, to become a legal American and maybe a citizen, who wouldn’t take that risk?”
For a current analysis of how our laws are being subverted, especially by the duplicity and the complicity of Mexico, read this article by Victor Davis Hanson, available here. You may be astounded. DLH and R Mall
