Associated Press
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)
At the surface, there's ample reason for optimism on comprehensive immigration reform. President Obama is investing considerable political capital into the issue; the public strongly supports the reform efforts; a bipartisan bill is already progressing in the Senate; and every Republican strategist and consultant is warning the party not to further alienate the fastest-growing voting constituency in the country.
Even House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) recently declared, "This issue has been around far too long. A comprehensive approach is long overdue, and I'm confident that the president, myself, others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all."
All House Republicans have to do now is be half-way reasonable and reform should become a reality. What could go wrong?
At a House Judiciary Committee hearing exploring an overhaul of the immigration system -- the first of several such hearings expected in the House -- Representative Robert W. Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia and chairman of the committee, tried to frame what he called the question of the day: "Are there options that we should consider between the extremes of mass deportation and a pathway to citizenship for those not lawfully present in the United States?"
It was a question later echoed by Representative Lamar Smith, Republican of Texas and the former chairman of the committee, when questioning Mayor Julian Castro of San Antonio. "Do you see any compromise area between the current status quo and a path to citizenship for virtually all the 11 million who are illegal immigrants in the country today?" he asked.
Hmm. Apparently, the position embraced by the White House, congressional Democrats, most of the public, and several Senate Republicans is now "the extreme" position, at least according to the far-right chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
What's more, around the same time as Goodlatte's remark, Boehner decided not to endorse a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and told reporters it would be "very difficult" for the House to approve the centerpiece of any credible, comprehensive reform package.
So much for the Speaker feeling "confident" about a "comprehensive" approach.
This is not to say the House GOP wants to do nothing -- their version of a compromise is approving measures they already like.
House Republicans on Tuesday staked out what they cast as a middle-ground option in the debate over immigration, pushing an approach that could include legal residency but not a path to citizenship -- as their Democratic counterparts favor -- for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country.
Republicans also signaled that they are open to the idea of breaking immigration legislation into several smaller bills, which would allow them to deal with the question of highly skilled workers, as well as a farmworker program, without addressing what Democrats and immigration advocates say is the larger issue of potential citizenship.
As for citizenship, Rep. Raul Labrador, a member of a bipartisan group of House members discussing immigration reform proposals, told reporters yesterday that undocumented immigrants don't really care about citizenship anyway, so there's no reason to make a fuss.
"They're not clamoring for it. It's only the activists here in Washington D.C. who keep clamoring for it," Labrador said.
So, on the one hand, immigrants could celebrate a semi-permanent status as second-class not-quite-citizens, and on the other, a comprehensive approach that nearly everyone agrees is necessary would be broken up so that provisions the right doesn't like could go away.
In fairness, I should note that many notable House Republicans have become rather cagey about what they are and are not willing to consider. They don't want a pathway to citizenship, and they don't like a comprehensive solution, but most of them have not categorically ruled out the possibility. These may be opening moves in a larger chess match in which the House GOP sees what it can get away with and how far mainstream voices can be pushed.
Or maybe the radicalized House Republican caucus fully intends to ignore the prevailing winds and public demand, and once again ruin any chance of serious policymaking in this Congress.
Leave a Comment:
You know, whenever I see an "R" after a politician's name, "republican" is NOT the word I think of.
Two issues that have to be considered. First, gerrymander. Most of the house yahoos who are standing against immigration reform are in gerrymandered districts. They ran on keeping brown people out and by god that is what their white evangelical constituents want. Second, cheap labor. Most of these guys get money from white Republicans and their corporations who have waxed rich off the cheap labor of undocumented aliens. If there is immigration reform they might have to pay minimum wage and provide basic safety and health benefits to their construction workers. Can you imagine what would happen to the owners of some of the big ag companies if they had to pay minimum wage to their migrant workers? They might have to eat lesser cuts of meat.
Immigration reform is going to be a heavy lift in the house. No way around it, Republican dogma and funders meet at the center of this issue.
Well said Ron Byers!
"They ran on keeping brown people out and by god that is what their white evangelical constituents want." - What do you think about the Evangelical Christians (NOW) calling for immigration reform? Using your analogy, are they "flip-flopping" now?
Can you imagine what would happen to the owners of some of the big ag companies if they had to pay minimum wage to their migrant workers? They might have to eat lesser cuts of meat.
Also, most food would cost more...for everyone. I do want to see this type of reform go through, but we all have to realize that with the relatively large increase in wages for agriculture and other jobs (along with benefits), there will be an increase in prices that we all will pay. Personally I am willing to pay the extra cost, but there will be some griping...and it may affect other parts of the economy.
If only the immigrants were rich white straight people, the baggers would not have such a moral dilemma.
"undocumented immigrants don't really care about citizenship "
Nice diversion of the issue:
As Ron Byers says, cheap labor is vital to the bottom line of a number of industries- agriculture (harvesting and processing) and housing(construction and maintenance) just two of them.
Gee..does only 36.5% of immigrants actually eligible for Green cards ACTUALLY applying to become Citizens mean they "don't care" about Citizenship? I would say absolutely....
Fascist, banana republic Republicans want cheap labor without the right to vote against them. End of discussion.
The republicans want mass deportations but they will settle for anything that doesn't allow full citizenship.
With citizenship comes franchise and the right to vote and the last thing they want are 11 million new Democrats.
The frightening slippery slope argument here is that they are willing to create and codify into law a system that creates a permanent underclass with potentially fewer rights privileges and a greater vulnerability to abuse.
They spend their time worrying about black helicopters and gun confiscation and here I am spending mine worrying about the new version of slavery...I must be slipping gears
I bet if you tell these GOTP Congress critters how much it would cost to round up the undocumented and send them back to their respective countries - they'd change their minds. Like the old song says "it's cheaper to keep her", yup, they'd be singing that tune.
The mindless...factless and basically ignorant chatter out of Liberals when it comes to the illegal immigrant issue truly represents how little thought they give to serious issues. Does it matter that during a recession you would dump another say...14 MILLION in the workforce that have broken American laws to begin with to compete with American workers at a time when MILLIONS have become discouraged and just stopped even looking for work? You know...things like Depressed wages and more NON lawbreaking Citizens finding work will be the result. Not to mention that the addition to the already bankrupted entitlement programs to support the families of these immigrants that have broken the law in the first place. Should they be paid for off the backs of the American taxpayer? Liberals are more than willing to be generous with OTHER PEOPLES livelihood....
It's 11 million and they are already in the work force. Since many of the scumbuckets who employ them don't mind violating the law, they pay them less than minimum wage depressing everybody's wages. We have to pay for their health care because they show up to emergency rooms for treatment, costing us money. Their kids go to our schools. They drive uninsured on our roads.
Scott, many of us have encountered illegals, and we realize that most of them are hard working people just like our parents and grandparents. Most just want to work hard and pay their taxes, just like the rest of us.
You need to deal with the fact that we aren't going to deport 11 million people. Personally I am sick of ranting loons like you. Suggest solutions or just shut up.
Actually...the figure is 11-25 Million. You don't know...nor do I. And do you somehow think I don't know they neither have 3 heads or are green like Martians? Amnesty has been granted TWICE. Either you respect American immigration law, or you do not. In the last Amnesty...the I-9 was a way to verify Socials and I.D's just as E-verify is the newest system now. The facts are is that Democrats stand in the way of putting E-verify in full effect due to "privacy concern issues". Just as Liberals starve ICE and refuse to let local police agencies handle immigration issues as should be allowed. Government turns a blind eye on the havoc these criminals cause and enforcement ABSOLUTELY should be handled by Police agencies. so..until Liberals quit protecting criminals...they are NOT serious about solving the issue to begin with.
Scotty; read my post below, then call back when you come to your senses.... Who's gonna' pick your lettuce, and wash your car, and clean your house? Certainly not you........
It's called "Work visa".....DUH....
Scott
An employer is the one who petitions for the work visa not the worker, and there is a limit on the number of work visas. Currently it is set at 33,000 per fiscal year for H-2B Temporary Non-Agricultural Workers.
So in order for some “wetback” to get a work visa of any kind they have to have a U.S. employer hire them before they get here, and at only 33,000 visas available a year that is a spit in the buck compared to the actual number of border workers we have.
The big American corporations are sending jobs out of country for higher profit margins, do you really think, they are going to spend $190.00 per work visa and then on top of that have to pay the border work the same minimum amount they have to pay us?
According to the “job makers” we have to think about the small business, do you really think that a mom & pop out can afford to pay $190.00 per employee
Yes, we do in fact need a work visa that the Mexican worker can afford, and we need a lot more that 33,000 work visa per year, - Immigration reform
http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1271.html#7
This is why Boehner wants the Senate to act first, so he could allow his bigots to lard up and destroy the bill. Sets up a showdown, which the bigots love because it's power. And it delays action for months...
Well....forget about THAT then. Been waiting 4+ YEARS for a budget....
Yeah. You want ANOTHER budget so the House can vote it down. It's a freakin' game. We don't 'have' a budget because the House doesn't VOTE for it. Then they submit a really BAD budget that the country doesn't WANT so the Senate will table it. Then they blame the President. Get your talking points straight.
How the He** do you know? There has NOT been one put out since the Presidents 4 years ago, and NO DEMOCRATS voted for it, and no attempts since then. Get your stupidity straight....
This is honestly some of the most scary crap the GOP is trying to pull, IMHO. They would basically get a permanent underclass workforce with no labor protection. There was a word for that... maybe it will come to me...
Is the GOP really trying to resurrect the Gingrich immigration plan and present that as a viable option?
Is it possible that the public supports this because it is easier than rounding up all the illegals and sending them back?
Surely the public can't support the "illegal" part of this can they? Why support illegal anything?
Can anyone tell me where the 3 trillion would come to build a border to border Mexican fence? Can anyone tell me where the other 2 trillion would come to force deport the 9 million people who are here illegally? Where is the money going to come from to process the 9 million applications for the amnesty? Too many unanswered questions, but I estimate a min. time of 9 years to become a citizen if the bills pass, and the whole thing is screwy. I am not advocating a fence, or deporting; illustration purposes of republicant nightmares.......
People know that the US has been here TWICE before. Amnesty granted with a promise of border security...and twice illegals have been encouraged to flood across the border due to the blatant lie of Border security. No more....
where would the money come from?
we can stop paying these entertainers for one thing. Allowing Oprah to get 3 million for sitting on a couch has to stop
Les: Fence would be stupid and easy to beat. Nobody other than nutjobs is talking deportation. The government does paperwork and long lines well, so worrying about those costs is foolish when compared to the money that would pour in from the taxes and legitimizing these hard working people. This is very doable, as long as we defeat the bigots IMHO...
What Dude here calls "bigots"..tends to be the American people that support ENFORCEMENT of American immigration laws on the books. Dude.....stupid can be spotted from a mile away,pal.
Scott, you still didn't listen and answer the questions. How would you pay for a three trillion dollar border fence, and two trillion to deport 9 to eleven million people? You can't answer the question, so go back to trolling on Drudge, your brother's' website.....
I already answered that question. It is NOT a matter of "rounding up" 11 million, it's a matter of allowing local police agencies to deport as these people enter the legal system...which is NOT happening currently. VERY EASY to remedy. Don't be a clueless schmuck. The answers have been in front of Liberals for years...it's Liberals intent to "stall and screw" the American immigration laws with Hussein giving HIS backdoor amnesty as a way to block enforcement efforts.
Scott: If the bigot shoe fits... wear it...
Dweedle Words Indeedly
Why would want to consider changes in legal immigration at the same time you consider changes in illegal immigration.
Legal Immigration:
After all we are allowing one million a year to immigrate legally, a rate half as much as the growth of employment for all citizens. We can see the reason for this as just being away to control the employed legal immigrants, keep them well behaved, subject to rejection, with the obvious benefits to profitability with low wages. It is one thing to have legal immigrate workers displace America citizens who are not technically literate in the specific skills that are needed to be used globally to compete with the United States. As this business oriented plan succeeds American gains a work force that more and more can be paid less and less. Thus the business center of gravity of the world moves away from U.S. in producing products. The quality of the products imported goes up, but as they change annually they also become less usable (in the hands on unskilled Americans), while attractive the observant consumer watcher finds that these products consume time that was previously used productively and hence the damage done. This superficially looks as the results of decades of business planning that bypasses education primary and secondary school system, puts an unusual strain of educational remediation on community colleges, and universities, and then tries to balance the educational quality problem with boosting attendance of the best and the brightest to post graduate programs. This extended analysis of legal immigration simply put benefits one or two percent of the population who by the way just might not have needed that much of a boost over non-technically literate Americans. It should not lost to history that a former developed country has chosen to bypass most of its humbler citizens while being diligently super selective of those it chooses to used instead.
Illegal Immigration:
In listening to this problem for decades the ability to use neglect as tool has become to demean the nation as whole. Neglect is as powerful a tool as any intensive feel good vibrating word smithing session from Frank Lutz. Compounded as woe-is-me, the drum beat and herder dogs set upon those that we have all but invited to the picnic; those ants looking for a few crumbs. Immigrant workers is a Business Strategy that combined the general neglect where the public chooses not seem, and the obvious need to have numerous seasonal workers, come and go with as small a business impact as possible. The Lutz phrasing with the "illegal" and "not lawfully present", it is just a mask held before the face, so it is, and so it will be that "illegal immigrants", in the millions are to be permanent second class citizens. There will be no face saving from national disgrace, the harvest of shame. Those illegal immigrants, will remain hidden, unseen, and will eventual pass away from natural causes, year by year and decades to go. We seem to need to make ourselves feel better by pretending that decades of neglect are no fault of ours, it never happened, blame elsewhere. We will approve of inflamed rhetoric or lutzing phrases to extract the political advantage. To obstruct at every juncture, to block resolution, to obfuscate compromise to refuse to accept responsibility for problem so long in the making that it is wonder that we aren't labeled from birth along with inked hand and foot prints with the stamp made in USA or of uncertain parents or an anchoring tattoo.
Politicians need illegal immigrants, to be used as herded pawns, and to claim to the utmost their patriotism because without a man made problems politicians would have but little to offer.
Please, Rich, your post is way to long. Can you condense the thoughts, without giving us the complete history? I need to read other posts, and there is no need for 2000 words on the history of labor. I know you can do it.....
681 Words, so you own me 1,319 perhaps on the topic of humanity, human decency, its history needs a more clarity.
The USA had immigrate laws on the books that were not enforced for several decades and millions of people came into this county. When a goverment does not choose to enforce those laws that means there was no laws being broken. The people that came into this county did not break any laws. Yes there were laws on the books, but those laws are not enforced. Those laws are just "laws on the books" "laws". To claim these millions of people broke the law is to claim the government has no resonsibilty and hide the truth.
There are many in the business sector that do not want the immigration bill to pas because it would deprive them of cheap labor. When you combine that with the xenophobic Republicans who hate all minorities, it will be no surprise that the Tea Party tries to water down the Senate immigration bill. The real question is whether they will pass a bill at all. My sense is that there are many Republicans who will vote against the bill but there may be enough establishment members to vote with the Dems to pass a bill. But that still will rebound on the Republicans for opposing the bill and Hispanics will be a major part of the Dem party for decades to come.
Love the show: I watch online often & appreciate Rachel's style of presentation. But please, look up the pronunciation of the word "posthumous".
What concerns me is the indigenous people of this country, the American Indians, remain mute.