The Democrats' Immigration Dilemma

Gloria Borger: The Party And Its Candidates Need To Solidify A Stance, Offer Proposal For Reform

(US News)  This news analysis was written by U.S. News & World Report columnist Gloria Borger.

---

For the past year or so, the Republicans handed the Democrats a gift that kept on giving: immigration reform. The GOP was divided -- with the president standing firmly against most of his party, calling for a "path to citizenship" -- as the Democrats watched the squabbling from the sidelines. Even more to the point, they were absolutely delighted at the prospect of picking up the support of Hispanic voters outraged at the efforts of some Republicans to deport 12 million illegal immigrants. It was a free ride, and Democrats were happy to take it.

Until the wheels came off. Hillary Clinton didn't mean to be the one to do it, but she was. Her struggle with herself over how to handle the issue of driver's licenses for illegal immigrants the other week changed everything. Not only was she caught without a clear idea of how to handle the matter; the entire dais of Democrats sharing the debate stage with her seemed to be a tad undone by the question -- and pleased that she had been called on first. That way, they could jump on her for taking both sides of an issue (a fair critique, to be sure) but delay their own answers long enough to figure out how to straddle the matter. And they're still doing it.

It's not hard to figure out why. Immigration is a killer issue, one that cuts so many ways it's hard for a pol to figure out just how to pander. Liberals are against building that fence to keep illegal immigrants out; conservatives are worried the fence won't be tall enough. Most Americans want some form of reform, yet the solutions are literally all over the map, largely constituency-driven. If you're from New England, for instance, your view is likely to be different from that of someone who lives in the Southwest. "I could empathize with Senator Clinton," Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, told me. "I've had to think my way through about what makes sense."

That's a nice way of saying that the Democratic Party -- and its candidates -- had better get started. And here's the key reason: Independent voters are unhappy that nothing has been done on the matter, and anyone who wants to be president needs to keep independent voters happy. In fact, a recent survey by Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg shows that the top issue underlying the discontent of independents is "unprotected" borders. For these voters, the matter of illegal immigration is a question of breaking laws and not a stalking horse for something else -- like racism. The public is practical and wants tougher enforcement. And if the Democrats can't find some way to embrace the principle of the rule of law, then they've got a problem. "We need to have a strategy beyond saying the Republicans are awful," says one top Democratic strategist. "And we don't."

Tough political call. So it's no surprise there's a debate raging within the Democratic Party about what to do. And the sticking point isn't about enforcement; everyone agrees that needs to be stronger. It's about benefits for illegal immigrants. Should taxpayers provide any? And, if so, what are the parameters? It's not an easy political call. "The push for more benefits is a killer," says one Democratic strategist involved in discussions about immigration. "The public doesn't want that, but it's a problem with some Hispanic leaders." Ipso facto, some Democrats -- like the ones running for president -- are unwilling to take it on.

That's a mistake. There's a smart analogy being offered by Greenberg, and Democrats ought to listen. Given voters' dissatisfaction with the lack of immigration reform, he says, why not actually offer a proposal to do something? It could be, he says, a "welfare moment." As in: Bill Clinton's end-welfare-as-we-know-it pledge in 1992. That plan was a major component of Clinton's success -- not only because it painted him as a new kind of Democrat but also because he seemed fearless in his eagerness to tread into waters Democrats had once avoided. Clinton's willingness to take on the issue was essential to changing -- and shaping -- the debate. It also transformed him into a leader. Now Hillary Clinton has the opportunity to do something similar, if she has the guts. The first candidate who gets there should get the credit.

Of course, that could well be Barack Obama or any other Democrat if Hillary Clinton's penchant for caution remains. That is, unless her husband can talk her out of it.

[klingon69]

Where is there a problem? Illegal Aliens are criminals. Just who is going to embrace criminals and criminality? No American is going to embrace them. No American will tolerate the Los Angeles "Special Order 40" that prohibits the LAPD from helping put these criminals in transit jail en route to whatever country they came from.
Posted by tucanofulano at 02:58 AM : Nov 15, 2007

A real big problem is the ANCHORBABY admendment. Now I know that it is difficult to change the constitution, but it can be done. Through another admendment, look at prohibition and the repeal of it.
What happens with the anchorbabies is that an illegal waddles across the border close to delivery. The baby is then born on American soil (in a hospital, unpaid for ususally). That child then has citizenship, that child being then "native born" can get into politics, and get elected by other anchors, then they can affect policy making favor toward illegals.

[mistered9]

I believe Gloria Borger needs to understand the positions of the Hopefuls.
If your given directions to some where and half way there you find it''s wrong, don''t you turn back and start over. That''s what Senator Clinton does.Common sence, which Gloria doesn''t have. It takes a little time and study (more then is given) to justify an answer. Borger just has a favorate(Probably GOP)

[megaprophet]

RON PAUL KNOWS HOW TO STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. Ron Paul has a plan: (1.) Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals. (2.) Enforce Visa rules. Immigration officials must track Visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their Visa or otherwise violates U.S. Law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired Visas. (3.) No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That''s a lot of people to reward for breaking our Laws. (4.) No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules, but taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services. (5.) End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong. (6.) Pass true immigration reform. The current system, and those proposed by ALL other candidates, is incoherent and unfair, and would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country.

[megaprophet]

YOU''RE A FROG IN A POT
My fellow Americans need to open their eyes to the fact that our Republic, along with The Constitution upon which it was founded, is being flushed-down the toilet by our nations'' bought and paid for politicians and media. While the Oligarchs warn and incite fear in the sheeple about the prospect of terrorism, they at the same time leave our borders wide open, and then conduct illegal wars overseas that do nothing but incite the terrorism which their Orwellian Laws like the Patriot Act and the John Warner Defense Authorization Act pretend to protect us from. Wake up America! It''s not about protecting you from terrorism, or Global Warming, or any of that other fear-mongering garbage the sold-out, mainstream media feeds you 24/7. It''s about feeding the bankers and the military industrial complex, and facilitating the global elite''s ability to ratchet-down control over the American people, placing us into a total control grid where they can surveille, track and control everywhere we go and everything we do. It''s the groundwork for tyranny. It''s the New World Order plan of Bush, Clinton, Edwards, McCain, Giuliani, et.al., being executed quite beautifully. You''re a frog in a pot: In order to cook a frog, you don''t throw him into a pot of boiling water. If you do, he''ll resist and jump-out. What you do instead is, you turn the heat-up REAL SLOW, and by the time the water is boiling, he won''t be able to jump out anymore, because it''s too late--he''s already doomed.

[megaprophet]

CLINTON MAKES BUSH DICTATOR
With the full support of Senators Clinton, Obama and McCain, President Bush recently signed into Law the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which, according to Senator Leahy (VT), will actually "encourage the President to declare Martial Law." It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a Laws which limits the President''s ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act, helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic Law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush has now undone all of those prohibitions. The John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which was signed by the President in an unpublicized ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency," suspend Congress; The Constitution; and to take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of your Governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder." President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act. The two Laws compliment one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad of those who dissent and are stripped of their citizenship, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home by allowing the President to order the military onto our streets in a domestic Law enforcement role, which is already being done. Vote for Liberty. Vote for Ron Paul.

[megaprophet]

CLINTON ALLOWS BUSH TO PARDON HIMSELF
Buried deep inside Military Commisions Act, which was FULLY SUPPORTED by Senators Clinton, Obama and McCain, is a provision which pre-pardons President Bush and all the members of his administration for any crimes which they may have committed all the way back to September 11, 2001. Why that far back? That kind of makes you wonder. Huh? I can''t help but recall what Nixon said during an interview following the Watergate scandal when he said, "If the President does it, by definition, it''s not illegal." History never repeats itself, folks. It only rhymes. At least Nixon had enough class to wait for another President to pardon him for his crimes against our country. Bush apparently doesn''t want to take that chance. He has to consider the risk that Ron Paul will become our next President.

[megaprophet]

CAMPING OUT WITH HALIBURTION
The John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which was supported by Clinton, Obama and McCain, permits militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters ("potential terrorists") and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities which are already contracted for and under construction by Kellog, Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. This Law, which was sold to an "emergency managed" and willfully gullible public in the wake of the 9/11 attacks as a necessary measure needed by our President in order to fight his "global war on terrorism," permits the indefinite detention of American citizens who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of our President. The Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International reported recently that global engineering and technical services powerhouse, Kellog, Brown & Root announced during January 2006 that its Government and Infrastructure division had been awarded a (no bid) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract to build these detainment camps with a maximum total value of $385 million over a five year term, and that this contract called for the company to build "temporary detention and processing capabilities" to augment existing U.S. government Detention and Removal Operations and to support "the rapid development of new programs." New Programs? Could it possibly get any worse? Why would the president be so concerned about Americans protesting? Aren''t we all happy campers?

[megaprophet]

ARE WE A NATION OF LAWS?
Consider the Patriot Act. The Law is 342 pages long, or 57,000 words, making it a bit longer than Dostoevsky''s "Notes from Underground" or, if you''re partial to pigs, about twice the size of Orwell''s "Animal Farm." The Patriot Act is the reigning champion of our government''s recent un-American activities. When it was first paraded before Congress and the Senate following the 9/11 attacks, few Members, other than Congressman, Ron Paul dared to vote against it. Most in Congress simply gave it their rubber-stamp of approval, without ever reading it. Why bother? It was, after all, named the "USA Patriot Act." It must be a good thing. Right? Now in effect, the Law wrecks a generation''s worth of constitutional protections against government snooping, legalizing police-state tactics in searches and seizures, criminalizing certain forms of speech and political activity, and opening the way for the mistreatment of foreigners in government custody and wholesale expulsions and imprisonment. It is a repugnant, unnecessary Law that goes against the very principles its name wrongly implies. Yet, it remains unchecked and unbalanced by public opinion, Lawmakers or the Courts. So, yes, we''re a nation of Laws. But the Laws aren''t much to speak of when they''re designed to hoodwink the public to win its docility. Neither is public responsibility much to speak of these days when its docility is secured with nothing more than a ploy-riddled play on the word "patriot."

[megaprophet]

WERE HAVING A TEA PARTY! YOU''RE INVITED
As we all know, freedom isn''t free in this country. Therefore, in the wake of our successful fundraising event of November 5th, in which we all came together to raise $4.2 million dollars for Ron Paul''s campaign, we''ve set yet another date for an even bigger fundraiser. This one will take place during on December 16th: a very important date for people who love freedom and hate tyranny to ring the Liberty Bell, and let our sold-out, globalist, political ****** and their mainstream media enablers know that good Americans are mad as hell, and that we''re not going to take it anymore. December 16th is the 224th aniversary of The Boston Tea Party: an act of protest by the American colonists against the tyranny of Great Britain where the Sons of Liberty boarded British ships and dumped crates of tea overboard into Boston Harbor. It was a key event which helped to spark the American Revolution, and we hope this event will, likewise, add additional spark to our own 21st Century political revolution to restore peace, prosperity and freedom to our Republic by helping elect a President whose record of adherance to The Constitution is unmatched by anyone in American politics. Please join us this December 16th for the largest one-day political donation event in history. Our goal is to bring together 100,000 people to donate $100 each, creating a one day donation total of $10,000,000. The time to act is now. The time for Ron Paul is NOW! TeaParty07.com

[megaprophet]

WILL THIS POST SOON BE A THOUGHT CRIME?
While CBS was busy pretending all other news didn''t exist during the California wildfires, our Constitution was burning on the floors of Congress. On Oct 23, the House overwhelmingly passed HR 1955, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. This Bill is one of the most blatant attacks against our right to freedom of speech ever devised by Congress. The Bill actually defines different types of thought as "homegrown terrorism," and unlike previous anti-terror legislation, it specifically targets U.S. citizens. The Bill uses extremely vague language to define "terrorist propoganda" as any speech which promotes an agenda that the government considers an "extremist belief system." Since the bill doesn%u2019t specifically define what an "extremist belief system" is, it will be entirely up to the interpretation of government officials. Isn''t that comforting? Considering how much the government has done to desecrate our Constitution lately, they would surely have to define this post as promoting an "extremist belief" system, since it promotes the restoration of civil liberties--something not en vogue these days. As disturbing as this Bill is, so to is the additional requirement that there be a seperate, "public version." In other words, the Bill we see is different from what Congress is seeing. Why''s that necessary? Whatever the reason, I predict this Bill will become Law soon while CBS focuses the country''s attention elsewhere