|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 7, 2007
CONTACT: Marisa McNee 917-733-2351
The Politics of Immigration Weekly Round-up: 12/1 - 12/7
Last week we made the observation that "when you say that the sky is falling, it sure helps if you are working like mad to tear it down," and that's especially true this week as we were given another dose of disappointment from Republicans and Democrats alike.
As the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Blue Dog Democrats attempted a good-faith effort at finding common ground on the immigration issue, Rahm Emmanuel continued his run-to-the-right immigration strategy by inviting pollster Stan Greenberg to talk to the Caucus about his latest "here's why we can take the Latino vote for granted" polling. Perhaps somebody ought to remind Congressman Emmanuel that Greenberg has a less than stellar record when it comes to polling on Hispanic voters (if you don't believe us, just ask John Kerry how well that worked out for him in 2004).
Meanwhile, the flip-flopping, fear-mongering and flat-out fabrication on immigration continues unabated by nearly all the Republican presidential candidates. This most recent version of trying to out-Tancredo Tancredo started last week during the CNN presidential debate with a painful exchange between Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani that was more appropriate for grade-school recess than it was as any kind of actual discussion about how to best deal with our broken immigration system. Do these candidates really expect the American public to believe they have a realistic, tough plan to solve one of the nationÕs most pressing issues when the best they can come up with is the grown-up version of "I know you are but what am I?"
This week Mitt Romney wins the prize for Biggest GOP Immigration Hypocrite: Despite his strong objections to Rudy Guiliani's accusation that he had a bit of a history have employed undocumented immigrants in the past, it turns out Romney's problem wasn't as much past history as it was present day reality. Whoops, it seems that Mitt Romney was still employing the landscaping company that relies on undocumented workers.
And, of course, not to be outdone by the Tancredo-lites Congressman Tancredo took immigration fearmonger to new levels of crazy this week with his most recent political ad equating immigrants with rapists, murderers, child-molesters and terrorists. If there's one thing we can always count on from Congressman Tancredo is that he'll provide the chattering classes, the pundits and his fellow Republcians ample opportunity to take the immigration debate right into the gutter instead of trying to solve the problem. But hey, at least he's not a hypocrite!
Read on for the weekly round up on the politics of immigration:
In the News
The Boston Globe Editorial Board takes a look at Mitt Romney's continuing immigration problem:
"Mitt Romney is caught again in the nation's swampy immigration laws, which only shows how badly the laws need to be reformed...
Last week, New York's former mayor, Rudy Giuliani, accused Romney of having run a "sanctuary mansion" for the undocumented immigrants who had done his yard work. It sounded like a rival trying to revive old news. Only it turns out that Romney continued to use the same landscaping company, which was still hiring undocumented workers, who admitted to Globe reporters that they were in the country illegally...
... he should return to his earlier support for the kind of comprehensive immigration solution that Senators John McCain and Edward Kennedy proposed this year. It could have helped him and his landscapers. But it failed, exactly because of the type of demagoguery in which Romney has been engaging. Now he, the country, and 12 million desperate immigrants have been left in the lurch."
Boston Globe Editorial Board, Romney's Immigration Lesson, December 6, 2007
And Tom Tancredo is once again making waves with his latest immigration ad:
Republican candidate Tom Tancredo of Colorado has a new TV ad, this one saying that "vicious Central American gangs" in the U.S. are killing mothers, raping children and selling drugs. The ad, which began running in Iowa on Tuesday, weaves images of tattooed Latino men and bloody bodies and blames "gutless politicians who refuse to defend our borders." Tancredo's earlier ad said Islamic terrorists who "froth with hate" have entered the U.S. It showed a hooded man appearing to blow up a shopping mall, leaving bloodied bodies behind.
That ad drew charges of fear-mongering, and Tancredo spokesman Alan Moore said the new ad is expected to be controversial as well.
The Denver Post, Tancredo's Latest Ad Targets Latino Gangs, December 4, 2007
The Pew Center released a new poll today indicating that the erosion of Latino support for the GOP continues. And despite what some Democratic pollsters have suggested, the evidence suggests that immigration is having a huge effect on Latino voters:
Some 57% of Hispanic registered voters now call themselves Democrats or say they lean to the Democratic Party, while just 23% align with the Republican Party -- meaning there is now a 34- percentage-point gap in partisan affiliation among Latinos. In July 2006, the same gap measured just 21 percentage points -- whereas back in 1999, it had been 33 percentage points.
This U-turn in Hispanic partisan allegiance trends comes at a time when the issue of illegal immigration has become an intense focus of national attention and debate -- on the presidential campaign trail; in the corridors of federal, state and local governments; and on cable television and talk radio.
The new survey finds that a plurality of Hispanics view the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party as the one that shows more concern for Latinos and does a better job on the issue of illegal immigration (although a substantial minority of Latinos see no difference between the parties on these matters). Also, many more Latinos say the policies of the Bush Administration have been harmful to Latinos than say they have been helpful.
Pew Center for Research, Hispanics and 2008: A Swing Vote?, December 6, 2007
Meanwhile, Congressman Rahm Emmanuel continues to create a wedge within his own party on the politics of immigration:
As a result, Baca and a group of Hispanic Democrats threatened revolt on two procedural votes last month to protest leadership handling of immigration. Now Baca is trying conciliation, reaching out to House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and centrist Democrats.
But detente over immigration cannot avoid emotional and political pitfalls. Emanuel invited Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg to the caucus meeting to discuss his polling on immigration.
Some Democratic strategists ridiculed this idea because of Hispanic lawmakers' skepticism about Greenberg's record on immigration.
In The New Republic last month, Greenberg equated the immigration issue with welfare reform, saying Democrats had to get tough on enforcement before creating a path to citizenship. Many political strategists disagree...
... Greenberg did not respond to requests for comment.
Some Democratic operatives have not forgiven him for his role polling for Sen. John Kerry (DMass.) during his 2004 presidential campaign. Greenberg predicted in July 2004 that Bush would win just 31 percent of the Hispanic vote. As a result of that polling, KerryÕs senior aides cut a $750,000 Spanish-language advertising buy, former campaign aides said.
On the Blogs
Man Eegee from Latino Politico and Duke from Migra Matters very eloquently point out that the word "illegal" is not a noun:
The Associated Press needs to work on their headlines.
Clinton says no to licenses for illegals
That word - illegal - is not a noun, it is an adjective. An adjective that should never be used for human beings. And, ironically, the people that use it frequently as a noun agree with that - only they have no desire to remind the general public that there are, in fact, human beings involved when it comes to an issue concerning the illegals.
Kos offers up his thoughts on the Stan Greenberg Poll:
Stan Greenberg, who along with James Carville does the Democracy Corps series of polling, also happens to be Rahm Emanuel's right-hand guy and chief ally in the effort to push the Democratic caucus and its candidates running for office to the far-right and out of the mainstream on immigration.
A vocal (bipartisan) minority is obsessed about immigration, but the vast (bipartisan) majority of Americans believe in comprehensive immigration reform that secures our border while providing a path to citizenship to undocumented immigrants.
Amazingly, Americans of all political stripes have reached that conclusion despite the loud demonizations of brown people by right-wing hate radio, the likes of Lou Dobbs, and the Tom Tancredos and Rahm Emanuels in DC without any significant push back.
Furthermore, as we have seen now two cycles in a row, Immigration is not an electoral killer. It's an issue, yes, and it must be addressed. But do Democrats suffer short-term pain by standing for sensible immigration reform? The same reform championed by the likes of George Bush, Harry Reid, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi, the Catholic Church, many evangelical denominations, and lots more groups on both sides of the ideological divide?
Of course not. The results in 2006 and 2007 speak for themselves. And long term, it's a path to a dominant progressive majority.
And DMI Blog put out a Memo to The Netroots on Immigration that largely deals with immigration, economic security and the middle class:
America's current immigration policy is clearly unacceptable to the general public, immigrant rights activists, immigration opponents and organized labor. Even corporations are dissatisfied with the status quo, even if for their own profit-driven reasons. There is a consensus that reform is needed but there is no consensus on what that reform should look like. At the same time, the status quo of maximum noise with minimum action is a political strategy for a certain segment of the organized right wing. The netroots can play a critical role on this issue by facilitating a conversation that will lead to increased political will for a progressive immigration policy that will benefit America's squeezed middle class and all those struggling to become middle class.
Many progressive and centrist politicians and political influencers have, until recently, chosen to either remain silent on the need for comprehensive immigration reform or confine their speech to statements supporting an increase in border control only. Local elections across the nation have shown that anti-immigrant demagogy does not win elections despite the public's concerns about the issue. Yet political leaders continue to advise progressives running for office to regard immigration policy as a "third rail" that should not be touched.
The current state of the debate on immigration policy is entirely unproductive and the relative silence of progressive movement voices has, and will continue, to contribute greatly to the lack of vision and unity on this issue. Treating immigration as a cause to support or attack for the sake of political expediency will not lead to an immigration policy that will strengthen and expand the middle class.
Other Resources
- For a closer look at 2007 races, visit Immigration2007.org
- For a look at polling and public opinion on immigration and legalization, visit the National Immigration Forum's website at ImmigrationForum.org
- For a look at the Latino electorate and the impact of the immigration debate, see NDNÕs report, Hispanics Rising
|
