Newt Gingrich has boxed in Mitt Romney - Now Mitt is painted in a corner in the Immigration Issue
POLITICO.COM
"The Arena" Forum
Forum : How Newt Gingrich is pushing Mitt Romney to extreme positions on Immigration
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Forum : How Newt Gingrich is pushing Mitt Romney to extreme positions on Immigration
Some excerpts :
*********************
Ryan Rudominer Former National Press Secretary, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee :
By slamming the GOP's extreme right wing push on immigration, Newt Gingrich poured gasoline on an issue that already blew up the candidacy of one leading GOP presidential candidate.
In one of the most consequential moments of the primary season so far, Newt forced the GOP to move beyond sound bites and finally confront the question of what to do with the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently settled in the U.S.
One can almost see the sparks flying as Newt declared, “I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families that have been here a quarter-century, and I’m prepared to take the heat for saying, 'Let’s be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship but by finding a way to create legality so that they are not separated from their families.'”
But, that’s just the beginning…
In typical Mitt Romney "take any position to win" fashion, Romney - once a supporter of the McCain-Kennedy comprehensive immigration reform approach – emerged as the most extreme, right-wing presidential candidate on the issue of immigration in history.
Denouncing Newt's position and racing to the right of every other presidential candidate, the Romney campaign embraced the radical right wing world-view of immigration that calls for mass deportation, ala Arizona and Alabama.
Though Newt may have doomed his primary chances by taking a sane position on immigration; by embracing a mass deportation position on immigration, if he emerges as the nominee, Mitt Romney can say hasta la vista to the 40% threshold of the Latino vote that any GOP nominee needs to win the general election. Not to mention, he'd find himself in hot water with swing voters who want mainstream solutions on immigration, not the extreme rhetoric that appeals only to the right wing base.
**********************
Ex-Rep. Artur Davis Former congressman (D-Ala.); Partner, SNR Denton law firm :
Gingrich's answer on immigration was the right one and he made exactly the right argument. There is a sharp difference between a $30,000 tuition subsidy for families who have come to the country illegally and a policy that declines to uproot families who've built roots in a community. The tuition subsidy is an instance of government giving a coveted resource to one class of people; a deportation policy that stops short of destabilizing families, but doesn't commit extra tax dollars to them, is not only "humane", it is inherently conservative.
To be sure, there is a constituency in the southern and western primaries that views immigration as a cultural threat, and Gingrich has shown some courage in taking that viewpoint head-on. But its a false caricature of the Republican Party and most conservatives to suggest that the nativist view is monolithic.
***********************
Laura Murphy Director, ACLU Washington legislative office :
Americans don’t want to see families and communities torn apart.
Yet that’s what state and federal governments have been doing in the name of immigration reform. State legislatures in five states have adopted “show-me-your-papers” laws. Thanks to Alabama’s H.B. 56, we now have evidence of how ineffective that so-called method of reform is.
In just two months we have seen an immense amount of damage to the fabric of Alabama’s economy, its schools and most importantly, families. The law has affected citizen and non-citizen Latino children alike, who not only feel unwelcome in their schools, but also in their communities. And many families that are contributing members of society will be ripped apart, as citizen children stay behind when their undocumented parents flee.
Alabama farmers are watching their crops rotting in the fields since Latino workers fled the state for fear of harassment. This has economic ripple effects beyond Alabama.
On the federal level, the Department of Homeland Security has done nothing to stop the cruelty in Alabama but continues to boast about its record deportation numbers. DHS programs have led to racial profiling and have only encouraged other states to pursue policies like the Alabama law.
On the other hand, the Department of Justice is doing what it can by suing Alabama and other states to strike down these unconstitutional laws. The Obama administration should align its policies to make them less damaging and more humane.
Gingrich’s compassion is an appropriate response, not just for the families involved, but for the businesses and communities that are adversely affected, especially during these difficult economic times.
****************
Richard A. Viguerie
Richard A. Viguerie Conservative fundraiser, activist and chairman of ConservativeHQ.com :
Was Newt smart on immigration?
Does anyone really believe that if Mitt Romney is elected President the United States government is going to frog march 10 million illegal aliens straight to the Mexican border? I didn’t think so.
Last night’s CNN/AEI/Heritage Foundation Republican presidential debate on national security showed the limitations of several of the Republican candidates for President on this important constitutional responsibility of the office - and it also showed the political gambler in Newt Gingrich.
During the debate Gingrich refused to play along with the conventional wisdom - as implied or stated by Romney and some of the other candidates - that the only solution to the problem of illegal immigration is to deport the 10 to 20 million illegal aliens currently living in the U.S.
"If you've come here recently, you have no ties to this country, you ought to go home period," Gingrich said. "If you've been here 25 years and you got three kids, two grandkids, paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church - I don't think we're going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out."
Gingrich cited the plan put forward by the conservative Krieble Foundation as an alternative to the current broken immigration enforcement system or the mass deportation of illegal immigrants.
.......................
Many inside the Beltway talking heads are already counting Gingrich out after last night’s immigration comments, but I am not so sure. Part of the Gingrich brand is Newt’s ability and willingness to look at the hard questions of public policy and propose provocative ideas in response. Only time will tell if last night’s immigration comments will be seen as an honest response to one of the intractable problems facing the next president or a political gamble that proved to be just plain dumb.
*************************
Ex-Assemb. Michael Benjamin Former member of the New York State Assembly (D) :
Newt Gingrich did himself and all of America a great service by addressing the reality of immigration reform. Real comprehensive immigration reform must involve some form of review for millions of undocumented workers and their families. Gingrich offers a good jump off point.
Now, whether he is seeking support from Hispanic or independent voters is another matter. If he is self-sabotaging, then he has found the right artery to slash. Being POTUS probably doesn't pay as well as being the smartest man in the GOP.
I hope Mr. Gingrich continues to tell mature truths to the fringe elements in the GOP. The sooner he gets out of the way, the sooner Rick Santorum gets to sit in the ABR chair.
Santorum can be the surprise Iowa winner, if he takes the ABR chair at the right time. Timing and money will make him the winner in Iowa. Newt can go back to his ivory tower and look down upon the misguided masses.
***********************
Ford O'Connell Republican consultant and chairman of CivicForumPAC :
Now that Gingrich is a GOP presidential co-frontrunner, he has to demonstrate message discipline if he wants to have a realistic shot at winning the nomination. And when it came to immigration last night, Gingrich failed.
In true Dr. John fashion, Gingrich took the right stance on immigration (for the general election), but at the wrong time (heading into the Iowa caucuses). At the very least, Gingrich should have waited until the Florida Republican primary before making his true feelings on immigration known.
**************************
Steve Murphy Democratic consultant; Managing Partner at Murphy Vogel Askew Reilly :
This is not a gaffe. Newt knows the polling and even a plurality of Republicans oppose deportation.
Also, Newt is known to think highly of himself and perhaps he is starting to see himself as president.
He also knows Republicans are going to lose Florida, and Rubio won't help, because he has separated himself from every non-Cuban Hispanic voter by denying he is an immigrant. It is ironic Newt is the one being realistic, given the enormity of his ego. Strange days.
**************************
teven G. Calabresi Professor of law, Northwestern University :
Newt Gingrich is absolutely right that the pro family party cannot be in favor of breaking up immigrant families.
Mitt Romney's demagogue-ing of the immigration issue is despicable and is the main reason why I, at least, have been unwilling to support him in either the 2008 or the 2012 election cycle. With the fading of Rick Perry and Herman Cain as viable candidates, Newt Gingrich has now emerged as the person who Republicans ought to support to be our nominee. As the son and grandson of immigrants, I am proud to support him. Gingrich is very smart and very well read. He will be a formidable candidate.
********************
Clyde Prestowitz
Clyde Prestowitz Founder and president, Economic Strategy Institute :
It was a good move. He is completely right in what he said and most Americans will recognize that. It may hurt him with some of the Republican base, but not fatally and he’ll nee
*********************
Christine Pelosi Attorney, author and Democratic activist :
Newt Gingrich's newest immigration plan is only "moderate" compared to mass deportation or electric fences. He lays out a plan that specifically opposes comprehensive reform and, in a dogwhistle to nativists' ugliest impulses, explicitly calls for English as the official language of the United States. That means, for example, no multi-lingual ballots or court interpreters.
Now I can see where limiting ballot access might appeal to the GOP - but who in the world wants to limit law enforcement, military and intelligence officials from communication with crime victims, witnesses and even anti-terror informants? Last night the former Speaker made a big deal out of supporting the PATRIOT Act and other devices to fight crime and fight terrorism - however, his English as he official language plank undermines that stance. As a former prosecutor, I can attest that multilingual court interpreters are integral to the pursuit of justice.
Newt Gingrich's stance on immigration may be "smart" on GOP politics but it is not smart on crime and must be rejected. If he truly believes that we need every tool available to keep Americans safe, he will backtrack from his plan to limit the multilingual tools we need to communicate with immigrant communities to keep us all safe.
**********************
Donna Robinson Divine Professor of government, Smith College :
Former Speaker Gingrich's stance on immigration is probably much more realistic than the conventional piety the Republican base seems to require.
Speaker Gingrich seems to have decided that as the now favorite alternative to former Gov. Romney, he can afford to put before primary voters an alternative and equally conservative way of thinking about illegal immigration - in other words, as a family matter.
...............
************************
Diana Furchtgott-Roth
Diana Furchtgott-Roth Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute :
The “deport them all” stance is impractical, as well as harmful to sectors of the economy, and it would be wise of Republicans and Democrats to embrace an alternative solution. It’s sad that President Obama has not fought to pass an immigration bill allowing more legal visas.
****************************
Ron Faucheux President of Clarus Research Group, professor and author :
If Gingrich really believes what he's saying on immigration, it doesn't matter if it's smart politics - it's the right thing for him to do.
*****************************
St. Rep. Daniel Patterson Arizona House of Representatives (D) :
I represent a southwestern border county and I think lobbyist Gingrich showed some smarter politics last night on immigration. It seems many voters are tiring of Republican's failed enforcement-only approach on immigration.
The recall this month in Arizona of anti-immigrant hardliner Russell Pearce showed immigration fatigue as a factor for voters, even in a very conservative district.
Newt's position may not help him with a majority of GOP primary voters in some states, but it shouldn't kill him. I noticed DC-insider Newt got strong applause from the GOP debate audience twice when he talked a slightly less harsh approach to immigration.
America needs a secure border and fair, comprehensive immigration reform now, as President Obama and Democrats have been saying, and I think more and more voters agree.
**********************
Christopher Hahn Democratic consultant :
I was pleasantly surprised with Newt's softer stance on immigration, however I'm a progressive and don't vote in GOP primaries.
When Perry took a similar stance at his first debate he took an immediate hit in the polls. Perhaps Newt is playing for Nevada and Florida where Latinos have a small presence in Republican primaries.
*************************
Peter Fenn Democratic media consultant :
Newt is playing for the general election, not the hard core Republican primary vote, plus this has been his position all along. The dirty little secret is that Gingrich does not adhere to many of the tea party positions even though his bombastic rhetoric might indicate otherwise.
*****************************
Ed Espinoza Western states Democratic consultant; former DNC official :
It took a debate on national security for a Republican to finally speak sensibly on immigration, and Newt Gingrich did just that on Tuesday night. Gingrich now becomes the most prominent Republican to say that deportation of 11 million immigrants would break up communities and families, and would be a logistical impossibility.
But in this Republican primary, good policy positions don't necessarily translate into good political standing - and that's just too bad, because we could really use an honest, sensible conversation about immigration in this country. If he loses traction in the polls because of these comments, his undoing will essentially be based on him being the smartest guy in the room. Ironic? Yes! Surprising? Not really.
**********************
St. Sen. Tim Mathern North Dakota State Senate (D) :
Within a decade we will be crying for new workers from other countries and the present efforts of deportation will look silly at best.
Gingrich is smart to steer clear of "deport-them-all" stance taken by the rest of the Republican rivals for the presidency. The chamber of commerce crowd knows there is a long term shortage of workers though our present unemployment rate is high. Gingrich is wise to be attentive to their clout in the final push for a nominee.
********************
Garry South Democratic consultant, The Garry South Group :
Newt, as usual, is smart, but may be too clever by half on this one.
The beginning of Perry's slide was when he defended in-state tuition for illegal immigrants. But Gingrich is now the frontrunner, and is displaying the confidence of a frontrunner in diverging from the common GOP wisdom (if you can call it that) on the explosive topic of immigration.
And although I'm no Newt fan, it was refreshing to hear him at least state the obvious - that we're not going to deport otherwise law-abiding people who have been here 25 years and are part of their communities - while Romney once again stood there shamelessly pandering to the nativist elements in the Republican base. If Romney's the nominee, expect his hardline answer to show up in Spanish-language ads by the Obama campaign.
*******************
Michael Shank U.S. Vice President, Institute for Economics and Peace :
Fiscally conservative Republicans should appreciate Newt Gingrich's plan. Why?
Because deporting America's undocumented immigrants would cost our country's already struggling gross domestic product $2.6 trillion over the next 10 years, according to a study by UCLA professor Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda. However, if America embraces comprehensive immigration reform, we add $1.5 trillion to the U.S. gross domestic product over the next 10 years - a much needed boost as we discover flagging third quarter growth.
The choice seems fairly obvious. America can ill-afford the continued noncitizenship of 12 million undocumented immigrants. America can ill-afford piecemeal approaches state-by-state. Gingrich is right on this. He's pursuing what's best for reform and what's best for our economy.
*****************
David Biespiel American poet, director, Attic Institute :
Newt Gingrich is a long-serving warrior in the conservative cause and his position, which is identical to Ronald Reagan's ("I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally") and which he has long framed as a family values position, will have little impact on his support - though, to be fair, it's just unclear how deep and lasting that support will be once primary voting begins.
Like Rick Perry before him (who was burned on the issue because he accused the GOP of being heartless, ignorant, and, well...there was a third one in there somewhere), Gingrich is right on the issue: The United States should not be in the business of deporting 11 million people, many of whom have lived here in a law-abiding and productive manner for over a generation.
********************
Sally Kohn Political commentator, founder and Chief Education Officer of the Movement Vision Lab :
How refreshing! A Republican who actually says what he thinks is moral and correct as opposed to saying whatever will get him elected. Of course, now we know for sure Gingrich will not be the GOP nominee.
***********************
Aaron Mannes University of Maryland scholar on terrorism and international affairs :
It is likely that Newt's stance on immigration will hurt him with "the base." Fortunately for him his major rival has a number of weaknesses with the base as well. Part of the problem is that this base has calcified into a set of impossibly rigid positions that no candidate can realistically satisfy.
However, this position will serve Newt well if he can make it to the general election as it highlights him as an independent thinker and it reflects a more humane side to a Republican Party that is looking increasingly mean-spirited.
********************
No comments:
Post a Comment