One Republican Who Makes Sense

Sessions Warns House GOP: Immigration Bill Is Bad Politics, Bad Policy
Offers a better way forward.
11:18 AM, Jan 29, 2014 • By DANIEL HALPERS


Yesterday afternoon, before President Obama's State of the Union Address, Senator Jeff Sessions' staff hand-delivered to each Republican member of the House an important memo on the so-called immigration reform bill being debated on Capital Hill. The 3-page document, written by Sessions, argues that pushing the current immigration legislation forward is bad politics, bad policy, and that there's a better way for Republicans.

Sessions believes House Republicans are at risk of falling into President Obama's trap. "[A]ccording to news reports, House Republican leaders are instead turning 2014 into a headlong rush towards Gang-of-Eight style 'immigration reform,'" writes Sessions. "They are reportedly drafting an immigration plan that is uncomfortably similar to a 'piecemeal' repackaging of the disastrous Senate plan—and even privately negotiating a final package with Democrat activists before consulting with their own members."

It's bad politics, Sessions writes. "In the rush to pass an immigration bill, there has been a near absence of any serious thought about the conditions facing American workers. The last 40 years has been a period of record immigration to the U.S., with the last 10 years seeing more new arrivals than any prior 10- year period in history. This trend has coincided with wage stagnation, enormous growth in welfare programs, and a shrinking workforce participation rate. A sensible, conservative approach would focus on lifting those living here today, both immigrant and native-born, out of poverty and into the middle class—before doubling or tripling the level of immigration into the U.S.

A sensible immigration policy would also listen to the opinion of the American people. Not the opinions of the paid-for consultants trotted out with their agenda-driven polls to GOP member meetings—but the actual, honest opinion of the people who sent us here. There is a reason why none of the corporate-funded ads for amnesty breathe a word about doubling immigration levels. According to Rasmussen Reports, working and middle class Americans strongly oppose large expansions of our already generous immigration system. Those earning under $30,000 prefer a reduction to an increase by an overwhelming 3-1 margin.

And bad policy, the senator from Alabama details. "Coordinating with a small group of the nation’s most powerful special interests, last year President Obama and Senate Democrats forced through an immigration bill which can only be described as a hammer blow to the American middle class. Not only would it grant work permits to millions of illegal immigrants at a time of record joblessness, it would also double the annual flow of new immigrant workers and provide green cards to more than 30 million permanent residents over the next decade. These new workers, mostly lesser-skilled, will compete for jobs in every sector, industry, and occupation in the U.S. economy."

He adds, "House Republicans, in crafting immigration principles, should reply to the President’s immigration campaign with a simple message: our focus is to help unemployed Americans get back to work—not to grant amnesty or to answer the whims of immigration activists and CEOs. In turn, that message could be joined with a detailed and unifying policy agenda for accomplishing that moral and social objective."

As for Sessions' "Better Agenda," he lays it out very precisely:

The GOP’s 2014 agenda should not be to assist the President in passing his immigration plan. Rather, it should be a consuming focus on restoring hope and opportunity to millions of discouraged workers. The GOP’s 2014 agenda should be a national effort—announced proudly and boldly—to reduce the welfare rolls and get America back to work, including:

• More American energy that creates good-paying jobs right here in the U.S.

• A more competitive tax and regulatory code that allows U.S. businesses and workers to

compete on a level global playing field

• A trade policy that increases U.S. exports and expands domestic manufacturing

• An immigration policy that serves the interests of the American people

• Converting the welfare office into a job training center

• Making government leaner and more accountable to U.S. taxpayers

• Restoring economic confidence by continuing our effort to balance the federal budget

An all-out immigration push is inimical to these goals.

The entire memo is here and worth a read:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...tion-bill-bad-politics-bad-policy_775906.html
 
good post. this is one of two major things that bother me because they seem obviously bad for the nation. how can the LFPR be lower than it's been in decades, still declining, and our 'leadership' is focused on granting amnesty or work visas to ILLEGAL immigrants AND making immigration easier? this really isn't a left/right issue. by putting 2 seconds of thought into this, anyone should be able to realize this is detrimental to the US. This means either our leadership is, as a collective, so incompetent that they don't know any better, or it is intentional. Seeing as certain far left jagoffs want to increase welfare spending, unem benefits etc AND increase the already excess supply of labor while stating they are focused on creating jobs .. I believe it's intentional because these policies contradict eachother.

If native citizens can't find jobs, why do you want more people in the labor market? this is an issue where even the most devout ocommie disciple has to realize something is amiss.
 
"... by putting 2 seconds of thought into this, anyone should be able to realize this is detrimental to the US.

The Left doesn't care about "detrimental to US"... they only want to secure the Latino vote... by "hook or by crook" is OK with them. ("The end justifies the means", in their eyes.)

:(
 
Jeff Sessions is one of the few republicans who puts country above party loyalty or more accurately, loyalty to big business contributors. It is obvious to any fool that this will destroy the republican party , which may be just fine with the aprty establishment.

You see, they are not conservatives, no matter how much they use Reagan's name. They are first and foremost errand boys for big business and K Street. That's who provides the money to run cmapaigns, hire consultants, pay for lavish retreats, etc.

It's no secret they don't like the Tea Party. They didn't care too much for the Evangelicals either, but they were for the most part naive and easily co-opted by rhetoric and lip service, kind of like the democrats handle blacks. What exactly did the Evangelicals ever get after a couple of decades of supporting republicans? Gay marriage and hundreds of millions for Planned Parenthood, both of which are supported by big shot "conservative" republicans?

The problem with the Tea Party people is they are both smarter and not that interested in playing nicely with everyone else. They see a party that has led conservatives down the road to disaster, and they see idiots still defending the Bush presidencies as great successes. We had McCain and Graham demanding we start another war in Syria. Seriously, who is worse, the amnesty crowd or the people who want to get us into pointless wars everywhere?

So people like Boehner and Paul Ryan, as well as the McCains of the world, really want to force the Tea Party people out of the party, even if it means losing a few elections. They reason that conservatives will still vote republican because the democrats are so reprehensible. With the Tea Party gone, they can safely move the party to the left to appeal to the emerging demographics of immigrants, minorities, homos, singlre women, etc, that the democrats exploit so efficiently. This is exactly what they are being told by their consultants, you know, the same ones who did such a great job with the McCain and Romney campaigns.

It's beyond frustrating because the republicans have been handed the midterm elections on a silver platter. You should be forced out of politics if you manage to lose them, with the debacle of obamacare weighing the democrats down. But by golly, they are going to do it. Then they will blame it on the Tea Party and the government shutdown and the conservatives not being willing to go along and compromise.

The only way to prevent this sellout is for the Tea Party groups to promise to run a third party candidate against any republican who backs amnesty in any way, shape or form. The most important thing in this world to most of them is their precious seat in congress, and if push comes to shove, they will not commit political suicide.
 
The only way to prevent this sellout is for the Tea Party groups to promise to run a third party candidate against any republican who backs amnesty in any way, shape or form. The most important thing in this world to most of them is their precious seat in congress, and if push comes to shove, they will not commit political suicide.

I agree the tea party should take a stance of my way or the highway on every major issue. And hopefully they'll also do this with the presidential candidate also.
The new Tea party slogan "My way or the Highway"
 
yes we are watching the destruction of the american dream for americans.

As if we don't know the minute these guys pass amnesty they will start agitating for full voting rights.

These establishment republicans are traitors.
If you think about it the only way this country was not going to be more conservative as it got older was to bring in massive waves of immigrants.

someone has been executing on a plan perfectly. think of all the pawns they have used along the way. I still can't believe union workers vote for these animals.
 
The only way to prevent this sellout is for the Tea Party groups to promise to run a third party candidate against any republican who backs amnesty in any way, shape or form. The most important thing in this world to most of them is their precious seat in congress, and if push comes to shove, they will not commit political suicide.
i like the idea but i doubt it will happen. anyway fuck the gop, i won't be voting for another establishment rep. if we have another mcvain/rombot, im writing in my own ticket and urging others do the same. that's all we can do. even if it costs the next pres election, it might wreck the two party system.
 
Ann Coulter weighed in as well:

http://news.yahoo.com/gop-crafts-plan-wreck-country-lose-voters-230115398.html

As House Republicans prepare to sell out the country on immigration this week, Phyllis Schlafly has produced a stunning report on how immigration is changing the country. The report is still embargoed, but someone slipped me a copy, and it's too important to wait.

Leave aside the harm cheap labor being dumped on the country does to the millions of unemployed Americans. What does it mean for the Republican Party?

Citing surveys from the Pew Research Center, the Pew Hispanic Center, Gallup, NBC News, Harris polling, the Annenberg Policy Center, Latino Decisions, the Center for Immigration Studies and the Hudson Institute, Schlafly's report overwhelmingly demonstrates that merely continuing our current immigration policies spells doom for the Republican Party.

Immigrants -- all immigrants -- have always been the bulwark of the Democratic Party. For one thing, recent arrivals tend to be poor and in need of government assistance. Also, they're coming from societies that are far more left-wing than our own. History shows that, rather than fleeing those policies, they bring their cultures with them. (Look at what New Yorkers did to Vermont.)

This is not a secret. For at least a century, there's never been a period when a majority of immigrants weren't Democrats.

At the current accelerated rate of immigration -- 1.1 million new immigrants every year -- Republicans will be a fringe party in about a decade.

Thanks to endless polling, we have a pretty good idea of what most immigrants believe.

According to a Harris poll, 81 percent of native-born citizens think the schools should teach students to be proud of being American. Only 50 percent of naturalized U.S. citizens do.

While 67 percent of native-born Americans believe our Constitution is a higher legal authority than international law, only 37 percent of naturalized citizens agree.

No wonder they vote 2-1 for the Democrats.

The two largest immigrant groups, Hispanics and Asians, have little in common economically, culturally or historically. But they both overwhelmingly support big government, Obamacare, affirmative action and gun control.

According the 2012 National Asian American Survey, as well as a Kaiser Foundation poll, only 40 percent of the general public holds a favorable opinion of Obamacare, 42 percent unfavorable. Meanwhile, 51 percent of Asians have a favorable opinion of Obamacare, 18 percent an unfavorable one. Even Koreans support Obamacare by 57 percent to 17 percent.

Overall, 69 percent of immigrants like Obamacare, according to a 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

That same survey showed that only 35 percent of native-born Americans support affirmative action, compared to 58 percent of immigrants, including -- amazingly -- 64 percent of Asians (suggesting they may not be as smart as everyone thinks).

Also surprising, a Pew Research Center poll of all Hispanics, immigrant and citizen alike, found that Hispanics take a dimmer view of capitalism than even people who describe themselves as "liberal Democrats." While 47 percent of self-described "liberal Democrats" hold a negative view of capitalism, 55 percent of Hispanics do.

Pew also found that only 27 percent of Hispanics support gun rights, compared to 57 percent of non-Hispanic whites. According to Latino Decisions, large majorities of Hispanics favor a national database of gun owners, limiting the capacity of magazines and a ban on semiautomatic weapons.

Seventy-five percent of Hispanic immigrants and 55 percent of Asian immigrants support bigger government -- also according to Pew. Even after three generations in America, Hispanics still support bigger government 55 percent to 36 percent, compared to the general public, which opposes bigger government 48 percent to 41 percent.

How are Republicans going to square that circle? It's not their position on amnesty that immigrants don't like; it's Republicans' support for small government, gun rights, patriotism, the Constitution and capitalism.

Reading these statistics, does anyone wonder why Democrats think vastly increasing immigration should be the nation's No. 1 priority?

It would be one thing if the people with these views already lived here. Republicans would have no right to say, "You can't vote." But why on Earth are they bringing in people sworn to their political destruction?

Republicans have no obligation to assist the Democrats as they change the country in a way that favors them electorally, particularly when it does great harm to the people already here.

Yes, it's great for the most powerful Americans to have lots of cheap, unskilled labor. Immigration definitely solves the rich's "servant problem."

(Approximately 5 million times a day, MSNBC expresses bewilderment that any Republicans oppose amnesty when it's supported by the Chamber of Commerce. Wow! So even people who profit by flooding the country with cheap labor are in favor of flooding the country with cheap labor!)

It's terrific for ethnic lobbyists whose political clout will skyrocket the more foreign-born Americans we have.

And it's fantastic for the Democrats, who are well on their way to a permanent majority, so they can completely destroy the last remnants of what was once known as "the land of the free."

The only ones opposed to our current immigration policies are the people.

But are they going to give John Boehner a job when he's no longer House speaker, as some big business lobbyist will?

Will they help Marco Rubio run for president on the claim that, as a Cuban, he can appeal to Hispanics? (Fat chance.)

Will they bundle contributions for Eric Cantor's re-election, as well-heeled donors will?

Will they be enough to re-elect Kevin McCarthy to Congress so he can keep his gold-plated government health insurance?

Will they be the ones writing Darrell Issa's flattering New York Times obituary?

Sorry, Americans. You lose.
 
Immigration is the zombie of political issues--even when it is dead, it is still alive. The combination of the Democratic Party, business interests, and a GOP operative class yearning for its promise of improved standing with Hispanic voters means that you can never really count it out.
That said, it is hard to imagine Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) moving forward after yesterday's closed-door showdown. According to estimates from those who were in the room--both in favor of moving forward and against--the dozens of GOP lawmakers who spoke were at least 80-20 against bringing a bill to the floor this year.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/31/Did-Showdown-Kill-Boehners-Immigration-Dreams
 
Back
Top