December, 19 2011, 11:37am EDT
GOP Contenders Continue to Toe a "Militant Line" on Immigration
As the Republican presidential campaign moves into the homestretch before the first caucus and primaries of the 2012 campaign, it's increasingly clear that the candidate field is lacking a true moderate on immigration reform in the style of Ronald Reagan and George W.
WASHINGTON
As the Republican presidential campaign moves into the homestretch before the first caucus and primaries of the 2012 campaign, it's increasingly clear that the candidate field is lacking a true moderate on immigration reform in the style of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. For no discernible political or policy reason beyond misguided conventional wisdom, the candidate field remains tethered to a far right immigration stance that will limit the eventual nominee's appeal to Latino voters in the general election.
According to Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America's Voice, "Look at what the supposed immigration moderates in the field are saying. Newt Gingrich is proposing to send 7 to 9 million immigrants home, and Rick Perry is defending his supporter Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the Latino community's Bull Connor. It's clear that the Republican field is anchored to the hard line right of the immigration spectrum."
As Beth Reinhard captures in a new National Journal cover story, "Again and again, debate over illegal immigration has punctuated a campaign billed as a referendum on the economy. Acting like candidates for president of their local Minuteman chapter, the contenders for the GOP nomination have been competing to out-vigilante each other, rousing some ardent conservatives. But drill down into the polling, spend an afternoon in Perry, or consider Newt Gingrich's surge in the polls even after he proposed an immigration policy that rivals tarred as 'amnesty,' and it becomes clear that Republican voters' views are more nuanced. What's more, hard-line rhetoric in recent elections has alienated Latino voters at a time when their power to swing elections is only growing. Antithetical to its past and potentially poisonous to its future, the GOP's militant line risks long-term self-sabotage."
Here's our take on leading candidates and recent developments when it comes to the 2012 cycle and immigration:
- Newt Gingrich: The specifics of Gingrich's immigration policy proposal remain far less impressive than the fact that his comments have shifted the focus of immigration discussions in the campaign toward the relevant question - what candidates would do about the 11 million undocumented immigrants living and working in the United States. Gingrich's call for a "red card" proposal of legalization but no citizenship for a small group of undocumented immigrants remains an inadequate policy solution for regaining control over the broken immigration system. On CBS's "Face the Nation" this Sunday, Gingrich detailed the limits of his proposal: "Seven or eight or nine million would go home and get a guest worker permit and come back under the law. The last two million are people who have been here a very long time." In reality, there would be no way for them to come back under current law. The more Gingrich specifies his proposal, the more clear it is that he's no immigration moderate. In fact, it's only compared to candidates like Mitt Romney - who wants to deport all 11 million - that Gingrich seems reasonable on the issue.
- Ron Paul: As forecasters and pundits like Nate Silver of the New York Times note the distinct possibility that Ron Paul could win the Iowa caucuses, it's worth reminding that Paul is far from a classic pro-immigrant libertarian. Though he opposes mandatory E-Verify legislation, Paul supports repealing birthright citizenship, voted against the DREAM Act in 2010, and said this summer, "why do we pay more attention to the borders overseas and less attention to the borders here at home?" Notably, Paul also revealed that his opposition to "amnesty" for undocumented immigrants has a distinctly political element and stems from not wanting them to become voters: at an August debate, Paul said, "I don't think that we should give amnesty and they become voters."
- Rick Perry: After the U.S. Department of Justice announced its findings of its investigation of the notorious anti-Latino Sheriff Joe Arpaio last week, Perry used the occasion to criticize the Obama Administration and to stick up for Arpaio, who has endorsed Perry and stumped with the candidate on the campaign trail. Perry's hard-line positions on border security, his support of "papers, please" state immigration approaches like Arizona, and his opposition to the federal DREAM Act add up to a candidate who never has been a real moderate on the issue. However, in the earlier squabble over his "heartless" comment regarding in-state tuition, Perry alienated the hard-core anti-immigrant crowd to the point that he has wildly overcompensated and now feels compelled to tout his anti-immigrant bona fides at any cost. Now, Perry's embrace of the notorious Arpaio will undoubtedly alienate millions general election voters should Perry somehow emerge as the nominee. For example, in addition to his anti-Latino policing tactics, Arpaio's department is in hot water for failing to follow up on "more than 400 alleged sex crimes between 2005 and 2007."
- Mitt Romney: Romney has endorsed mass deportation as his immigration policy vision, spelling out his goal of evicting the entire undocumented population from the U.S. without exception. Witness his recent call for the entirety of the undocumented population to, "return home and get in the - in line at the back of the line with everybody else that wants to come here....So, from my view-- viewpoint, the key-- the key measure is this: No favoritism for permanent residency or citizenship for those that have come here illegally." However, the "line" that Romney is referring to simply doesn't exist; hence the need for comprehensive immigration reform in the first place. As Peter Wallsten assessed in the Washington Post, "Republicans are increasingly worried that their party's efforts to win a competitive slice of the fast-growing Hispanic vote in important presidential battleground states are being undermined by Mitt Romney's heated rhetoric on illegal immigration. Several leading GOP strategists say Romney's sharp-tongued attacks have gained wide attention in Hispanic media and are eroding the party's already fragile standing in that community." Romney remains in a dangerous place politically, as his attempts to pander to the small sliver of Republican primary voters who are adamantly hard-line on immigration continues to be at the expense of even minimal levels of appeal to Latino voters in a potential general election.
America's Voice -- Harnessing the power of American voices and American values to win common sense immigration reform. The mission of America's Voice is to realize the promise of workable and humane comprehensive immigration reform. Our goal is to build the public support and create the political momentum for reforms that will transform a dysfunctional immigration system that does not work into a regulatory system that does.
LATEST NEWS
Amid Spying Fight, House Passes Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," said one advocate.
Apr 17, 2024
While applauding the U.S. House of Representatives' bipartisan passage of a bill to ensure that "law enforcement and intelligence agencies can't do an end-run around the Constitution by buying information from data brokers" on Wednesday, privacy advocates highlighted that Congress is trying to extend and expand a long-abused government spying program.
The House voted 219-199 for Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act (FANFSA), which won support from 96 Democrats and 123 Republicans, including the lead sponsor, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio). Named for the constitutional amendment that protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, H.R. 4639 would close what campaigners call the data broker loophole.
"The privacy violations that flow from law enforcement entities circumventing the Fourth Amendment undermine civil liberties, free expression, and our ability to control what happens to our data," said Free Press Action policy counsel Jenna Ruddock. "These impacts affect everyone who uses digital platforms that extract our personal information any time we open a browser or visit social media and other websites—even when we go to events like demonstrations and other places with our phones revealing our locations."
"We're grateful that the House passed these vital and popular protections," she added. "The bill would prevent flagrant abuses of our privacy by government authorities in league with unscrupulous third-party data brokers. Making this legislation into law with Senate passage too would be a decisive and long-overdue action against government misuse of this clandestine business sector that traffics in our personal data for profit."
Wednesday's vote followed the House sending the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act to the Senate. H.R. 7888 would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows for warrantless spying on noncitizens abroad but also sweeps up Americans' data.
The House notably included an amendment forcing a wide range of individuals and businesses to cooperate with government spying operations but rejected an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the bill, which the Senate could vote on as soon as Thursday.
Noting those decisions on the FISA reauthorization legislation, Ruddock stressed that "today's vote is a victory but follows a recent loss and ongoing threat as that Section 702 bill moves to the Senate this week too."
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," she argued. "That means passing FANFSA and reforming Section 702 authority—and prioritizing everyone's First and Fourth Amendment rights."
Jeramie Scott, senior counsel and director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Project on Surveillance Oversight, also praised the House's FANFSA passage on Wednesday.
"The passage of the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale underscores the extent to which reining in abusive warrantless surveillance is a bipartisan issue," Scott said. "We urge the Senate to take up this measure and close the data broker loophole."
Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at ACLU, similarly said Wednesday that "the bipartisan passage of this bill is a flashing warning sign to the government that if it wants our data, it must get a warrant."
Hamadanchy added that "we hope this vote puts a fire under the Senate to protect their constituents and rein in the government's warrantless surveillance of Americans, once and for all."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a critic of the pending 702 bill and FANFSA's lead sponsor in the upper chamber, called the the House's Wednesday vote "a huge win for privacy" and said that "now it's time for the Senate to follow suit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked Cables Show Biden Pressuring Nations to Oppose Palestine's UN Membership
"This is the evidence that President Biden's talk about a two-state solution is nothing but idle talk," said one former Lebanese diplomat.
Apr 17, 2024
As the United Nations Security Council prepares to vote Thursday on Palestine's bid to become a full U.N. member, the Biden administration—which claims to support Palestinian statehood—is lobbying UNSC nations in an effort to wrangle enough "no" votes so that the United States can avoid resorting to a veto.
Leaked cables obtained by The Intercept show U.S. pressure on Security Council members including Malta—which currently presides over the body—and Ecuador.
While claiming that President Joe Biden backs "Palestinian aspirations for statehood," one of the cables asserts that "it remains the U.S. view that the most expeditious path toward a political horizon for the Palestinian people is in the context of a normalization agreement between Israel and its neighbors."
"We therefore urge you not to support any potential Security Council resolution recommending the admission of 'Palestine' as a U.N. member state, should such a resolution be presented to the Security Council for a decision in the coming days and weeks," the document advises.
The U.S. argument essentially is that the U.N. should not create an independent Palestinian state by fiat—even though that's precisely how the world body voted in 1947 to establish the modern state of Israel.
The renewed push for Palestine's U.N. membership comes as Israel wages a genocidal war on the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority, which hasn't controlled Gaza for nearly two decades, rejected the Biden administration's requests to hold off on seeking full membership.
"We wanted the U.S. to provide a substantive alternative to U.N. recognition. They didn't," one unnamed Palestinian official toldAxios on Wednesday. "We believe full membership in the U.N. for Palestine is way overdue. We have waited more than 12 years since our initial request."
As The Intercept's Ken Klippenstein and Daniel Boguslaw noted:
Since 2011, the U.N. Security Council has rejected the Palestinian Authority's request for full member status. On April 2, the Palestinian Observer Mission to the U.N. requested that the council once again take up consideration of its membership application. According to the first State Department cable, U.N. meetings since the beginning of April suggest that Algeria, China, Guyana, Mozambique, Russia, Slovenia, Sierra Leone, and Malta support granting Palestine full membership to the U.N. It also says that France, Japan, and Korea are undecided, while the United Kingdom will likely abstain from a vote.
Along with the United States, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom are permanent members of the UNSC, so they also have veto power.
Ahead of Thursday's planned vote, Spain has been doing its own lobbying in Europe to build greater support for Palestinian statehood. At a joint Tuesday press conference with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Golob said the question is "when, not if, but when is the best moment to recognize Palestine."
Belgium—which is seeking economic sanctions against Israel in response to its genocidal war on Gaza—is expected to join Spain's push for Palestinian statehood after the country's European Union presidency expires in June.
Currently, 139 of the U.N.'s 193 member states recognize Palestine as an independent state.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who has also claimed to support a so-called "two-state solution"—has alternately boasted about thwarting Palestinian statehood.
Critics pointed to the leaked cables as more proof of U.S. duplicity and double standards on the Israel-Palestine issue.
"This is the evidence that President Biden's talk about a two-state solution is nothing but idle talk," Massoud Maalouf, a former Lebanese ambassador to Canada, Chile, and Poland, said on social media.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Database Exposes 'Illicit Network Undermining Democracy Around the World'
Yanis Varoufakis hailed the effort as "a treasure chest of well-researched reports on how the reactionaries of the world unite."
Apr 17, 2024
"Coups. Assassinations. Riots. Detentions. Disinformation. We know the tactics that have been deployed to undermine our democracies. But who is behind them?"
Progressive International (PI) asks and answers this and other questions with an extensive new database published Wednesday that connects the dots in what the leftist group calls the "Reactionary International"—a loose global network of right-wing leaders and organizations working to subvert democratic institutions.
PI calls it an "illicit network undermining democracy around the world."
"Today is a mask-off moment for the Reactionary International and the parties, politicians, judges, journalists, foundations, think tanks, tech platforms, NGOs, activists, financiers, and entrepreneurs that comprise it," PI said.
"After a year of preparation, we finally open the doors to our new research consortium, exposing the global network of reactionary forces that corrode our democracies, destroy our planet, and drive us closer to world war," the group added.
"The twin insurrections at the U.S. Capitol in 2021 and Brasília's Three Powers Plaza in 2023 left no doubt about the international coordination of reactionary forces," PI argued. "Yet far too little is known about the entities of this network, their sources of financing, and their institutional allies operating inside our political systems."
Ultimately, PI aims to "support democratic systems to become more resilient to their insidious tactics."
From leaders like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and former U.S. President Donald Trump—the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee—to evangelical Christian groups influencing laws in African countries criminalizing LGBTQ+ people and tech companies empowering ubiquitous state surveillance, Reactionary International is a who's-who of the world's right-wing forces.
A cursory search of the database's contents shows users can:
- Learn about Israel's NSO, Rayzone, and Team Jorge, and how a team of Tel Aviv tech entrepreneurs fuel unrest in Latin America;
- Meet the Grey Wolves, Turkey's roving death squad with links to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the ethno-nationalists in his governing coalition; and
- Explore the global network of the Falun Gong, its Trump-connected media outlet The Epoch Times, and its traveling dance troupe known as Shen Yun.
Yanis Varoufakis, a PI member and secretary-general of the left-wing Democracy in Europe Movement 2025, called the database "a treasure chest of well-researched reports on how the reactionaries of the world unite."
PI invites the public to contribute to the database.
"Together, we will not only name, shame, and expose the forces of the far right—but also dismantle their network of complicity," the group said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular