• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Repubs talk Citizenship for Illegals

A

Anonymous

Guest
Rubio, McCain, Hatch ready to negotiate on pathway to citizenship


By Cameron Joseph - 11/13/12 08:25 PM ET

All three are expected to be key players on any immigration-reform negotiations, expected to move first in the Senate.

Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), three key Republican players on immigration, told The Hill they're ready to start working on broad-based reforms next year that could include a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States.


All three are expected to be key players on any immigration-reform negotiations, which are expected to move first in the Senate.


“Everything ought to be on the table,” Hatch said when asked if he’d be willing to negotiate on a comprehensive bill that included a pathway to citizenship. “There are a lot of very important legal considerations that have to be made, but I've always been empathetic towards resolving this problem one way or the other.”

McCain said he believes it’s “very likely” that the Senate will come up with a comprehensive bill, suggesting that the GOP’s poor showing at the polls among Latino voters, which many in the party have blamed for losses last Tuesday, is pushing more members toward being willing to negotiations.

McCain had abandoned his support for a comprehensive bill during a 2010 primary challenge from former Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.) and had moved toward enforcement-first rhetoric on immigration. But he sounded like the McCain of old on Tuesday.

“There's a sense of urgency in the Republican Party for obvious reasons, and I'm sure that everybody's ready to deal. But the specifics? Too early,” he said when asked about a comprehensive bill that included a pathway to citizenship.

When asked if that meant he wasn’t ruling out anything at this point, McCain nodded.

“Oh, I think it's very likely that we get it resolved, but there are going to be some tough negotiations," he said.

Rubio, a Hispanic who is trusted and beloved by the GOP base, could be the most important player to watch in the negotiations, depending on how far he’s willing to go and how involved he’s willing to be. He seemed more hesitant to embrace the concept of a big package than McCain or Hatch but didn’t close the door on a single, comprehensive bill. In the past, that’s usually meant a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants in the U.S., stricter border enforcement, a temporary worker program for industries such as agriculture and a crackdown on those who hire undocumented immigrants.

“People are interested in it. It's going to take some time,” he said. “It's an important issue for the country economically, it behooves us to have a 21st century immigration policy.”

Rubio said he “didn’t have anything to announce today” on how involved he’ll be with the issue, but said he was “hopeful we’ll be able to work on something.”

The Florida senator, who’d begun to work on a Republican version of the “DREAM Act” last year before President Obama ordered temporary visas be given to some undocumented immigrants brought here as children, said he preferred an enforcement-first policy — but didn’t close the door on agreeing to a broader bill down the line.

“As I've said, in my opinion, the first steps in all of this is to win the confidence of the American people by modernizing the legal immigration issue and by improving enforcements of the existing law. And then, obviously, we're going to have to deal with 11 million people who are here in undocumented status,” he said when asked about the possibility of a pathway to citizenship. “I think it'll be a lot easier to figure that out if we do those other steps first. But like I said, there are going to be a lot of opinions on this.”

Hatch, an original sponsor of the DREAM Act, voted against it in 2010, largely because of concerns about a 2012 Tea Party primary challenge.

Funny how quickly priniciples go down the drain- when a politician is looking for ways to get re-elected.... :wink: :lol:
 

Steve

Well-known member
They may pick up a percentage or two of the Latino vote,.. but they will loss most of the conservative/republican vote...

so is it really worth it... ?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
This would have been done much sooner, if the 2008 election had gone differently.

But the "pathway to citizenship" won't garner votes for the Republicans any more so now, than it did then.



The McCain-Palin Approach
McCain and Palin support the following policies:

Finishing securing the borders in an expedited manner first (this fully meshes with the Republican Party Platform);
Prosecuting "bad actor" employers, implementing real-time new employment verification systems to screen workers for hiring eligibility, and addressing issues of social security number misuse; and
Creating a temporary worker program for both highly-skilled workers and low-skilled workers (agricultural and non-agricultural), while protecting U.S. workers' employment opportunities;
"Addressing the undocumented" by allowing them to enroll in a program to change their status, thereby keeping families together and avoiding creating a "permanent second class" (McCain has fought hard to try to convince Conservatives that legalization or a pathway to citizenship is not "amnesty," since the undocumented immigrants would need to wait at the end of the line, learn English, pay back taxes and fines, and pass a citizenship course, but despite the careful use of language, this program still amounts to a pathway to citizenship); and
Reducing backlogs in the family categories, sometimes as long as 20 years.

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2008,1029-thal.shtm
 

James T

Well-known member
Steve said:
They may pick up a percentage or two of the Latino vote,.. but they will loss most of the conservative/republican vote...

so is it really worth it... ?

It's become very clear that the conservative vote just won't pull as much weight as thought.
 

James T

Well-known member
Their is no shortage of US citizens of Mexican heritage who still have family back in Mexico that they would like to see move here. Their vote pulls a lot of weight. Any presidential candidate that says "no" to any plan to accept the ILLEGAL immigrants is going to lose the election. IT ticks me off that these illegals will get what they want while other immigrants pay out the a$$ to get here, by following the rules.[/u]
 

TSR

Well-known member
James T said:
Their is no shortage of US citizens of Mexican heritage who still have family back in Mexico that they would like to see move here. Their vote pulls a lot of weight. Any presidential candidate that says "no" to any plan to accept the ILLEGAL immigrants is going to lose the election. IT ticks me off that these illegals will get what they want while other immigrants pay out the a$$ to get here, by following the rules.[/u]


I may be ticked off too, I think we need to see the details. I would like to see all of them deported and have to come back and get in line but I know it ain't likely to happen, especially the deportation, maybe the getting in line. I say this knowing they, for the most part, are hard working people, but we/they should follow our laws!
 

James T

Well-known member
TSR, I don't begrudge the Mexican citizen for wanting to be here. I have seen first hand how they live in Mexico. And, I admit that I have used their services here in Texas. They are very hard working and will do work that no one else will. They are not at fault, the Mexican and US governments are at fault. Their is no reason why the two governments can't setup an immigration conveyance system for Mexicans citizens to immigrate. The rate of the immigration fees can be set accordingly and the numbers allowed as well, just like we do for citizens of other countries(like India) that want to immigrate. What does the average illegal pay a coyote to get them across the border? Just setup a system that involves that amount of money. At least they would get tagged!
 

canadian angus

Well-known member
James T said:
TSR, I don't begrudge the Mexican citizen for wanting to be here. I have seen first hand how they live in Mexico. And, I admit that I have used their services here in Texas. They are very hard working and will do work that no one else will. They are not at fault, the Mexican and US governments are at fault. Their is no reason why the two governments can't setup an immigration conveyance system for Mexicans citizens to immigrate. The rate of the immigration fees can be set accordingly and the numbers allowed as well, just like we do for citizens of other countries(like India) that want to immigrate. What does the average illegal pay a coyote to get them across the border? Just setup a system that involves that amount of money. At least they would get tagged!

Tagged, hmmmm! And my calves beller, would it not be better to use a different term on a cattle forum?

CA
 

TSR

Well-known member
James T said:
TSR, I don't begrudge the Mexican citizen for wanting to be here. I have seen first hand how they live in Mexico. And, I admit that I have used their services here in Texas. They are very hard working and will do work that no one else will. They are not at fault, the Mexican and US governments are at fault. Their is no reason why the two governments can't setup an immigration conveyance system for Mexicans citizens to immigrate. The rate of the immigration fees can be set accordingly and the numbers allowed as well, just like we do for citizens of other countries(like India) that want to immigrate. What does the average illegal pay a coyote to get them across the border? Just setup a system that involves that amount of money. At least they would get tagged!

I think that money/fines will be a part. I have a lot of respect for the Hispanics I've seen they are very hard workers aand family oriented-good qualities, its just that I also have a lot of respect for our laws!
 

ranch hand

Well-known member
A top Democratic and a Republican lawmaker on Sunday each presented a similar plan for comprehensive immigration reform that would offer a path to citizenship for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States -- but not until the country secures its borders.

Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., discussed their proposals on separate morning talk shows -- just days after President Obama won re-election with more than 70 percent of the Latino vote.

Schumer said he and Graham have resumed talks on immigration policy that broke off two years ago.

He said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that they have put together a “comprehensive detailed blueprint” that has "the real potential for bipartisan support”

The plan is based on the assumption that most Americans are for legal immigration but “very much” against illegal immigration, said Schumer, chairman of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, refugees and border security.

However, Graham made no mention of Schumer in presenting his proposal, in which applicants would begin the process by emerging from the “shadows” to pay a fine, then start paying taxes.

He said applicants also must learn to speak English and that they would have to “get in the back of line,” which could mean the process for receiving a green card could take decades.

“They can't cut in front of the line regarding people who are doing it right,” Graham said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

In the aftermath of the election Tuesday, Republican leaders have begun examining ways to bring Hispanics into the party. They made up 10 percent of the electorate in 2012, compared to 9 percent in the 2008 presidential election cycle.

A spokesman for the Republican National Committee told Fox News on Saturday that Chairman Reince Priebus has ordered a “full analysis” of the 2012 election cycle that will focus on why the party failed to connect with female, independent and younger voters, but more specifically Hispanics.

Obama helped his chances of winning the Hispanic vote in re-election when he said in June that the U.S. would suspend deportation for hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants brought to this country as children by their parents.

On Friday, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said it was time to address immigration policy. He urged Obama to take the lead in coming up with a plan that would look at improved enforcement of immigration law and the future of the millions living in the country illegally. Boehner, however, did not commit to the citizenship issue.

Graham said that the "tone and rhetoric" Republicans used in the immigration debate of 2006 and 2007 "has built a wall between the Republican Party and Hispanic community," causing Hispanic support to dwindle from 44 percent in 2004 to 27 percent in 2012.

"This is an odd formula for the party to adopt, the fastest growing demographic in the country, and we're losing votes every election,” he said. “It's one thing to shoot yourself in the foot, just don't reload the gun. I intend not to reload this gun when it comes to Hispanics. I intend to tear this wall down and pass an immigration reform bill that's an American solution to an American problem," he said.

Both senators said the overhaul would include developing a secure document to assure employers they're hiring people authorized to work in the country, and allowing legal immigration for needed workers at all skill levels.

Each path to citizenship would require immigrants to learn English, go to the back of the citizenship line, have a job and not commit crimes.

Graham said the overhaul would have to be done in such a way that "we don't have a third wave of illegal immigration” 20 years from now.

“That's what Americans want,” he said. “They want more legal immigration and they want to fix illegal immigration once and for all."

In exit polls on Tuesday, the Associated Press found 65 percent favored offering most illegal immigrant workers in the United States a chance to apply for legal status, more than double the number who said most should be deported.

Even among Republicans, the party associated with crackdowns on illegal immigration, about half favored a path toward staying in the U.S.
 

Mike

Well-known member
"Repubs Talk Citizenship For Illegals"

Republicans have many times endorsed a "Path To Citizenship" for the presently illegal. Most times by deportation and/or self deportation and legal re-entry.

After all, we must be fair to those following the law.

Reagan's plan did not set in motion any sort of plan for "Amnesty" without following a rigorous set of rules to abide by.

What else is new? :roll:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Reagan's plan did not set in motion any sort of plan for "Amnesty" without following a rigorous set of rules to abide by.

have you liberals ever heard the saying fool me once, shame on me,...

well I ain't buying it this time... last time.. we had strict rules.. they were never enforced,..

we had a set number.. about 300,000 farm workers if i remember right.. and that number shot up to several million...

and soon we will have another set of laws,.. and 11 million will balloon to 22 million...

right now, we have a president actively disregarding existing laws..

so what makes you liberals think for one minute he will follow ever tougher laws?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Immigration Reform Could Help the Democrats in 2014 and 2016


In his post-election press conference, President Obama made it clear that immigration reform is a top issue for him. And well it should be on two fronts. First, if it gets it through, his legacy will read: first term he passed Obamacare, second term he legalized the status of 12 million illegal aliens. But politically, it is even more important as immigration is a real wedge issue. If the immigration bill written by senators John McCain and Teddy Kennedy is reintroduced, Obama could get back into campaign mode and fly all over the country encouraging people to email their senators and representatives to support it. After a few weeks of that, he would own the issue. If the enough Republicans supported the bill for it to pass, Obama would get most of the credit and Latinos would surely remember that in 2014 and 2016. If the Republicans killed the bill either by filibustering it in the Senate and voting it down in the House, Latino voters would remember that for a long time. Actually, for Obama the second route (losing) is probably better because it allows the Democrats to support immigration reform in 2014 and 2016, keeping it a potent issue among Latinos. If the bill passes, after a while it will cease to be an issue. After all, how many blacks now vote for the Republicans because they freed the slaves? (Actually, the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free any slaves because there weren't any slaves in the North and the South just ignored it, but it is a nice myth.)

Even better for Obama, is that a drive on immigration will split the Republican Party wide open. The nativist base will call it "amnesty" and be violently against it. The pros, like Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and Karl Rove, will understand clearly the dire electoral consequences of opposing it and try to get something passed. It won't be pretty.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Larrry said:
Would suing Arizona fall under the category of immigration reform?

Nope- just following the Constitution... As the SCOTUS affirmed-- immigration law is constitutionally a Federal Issue...
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Larrry said:
Would suing Arizona fall under the category of immigration reform?

Nope- just following the Constitution... As the SCOTUS affirmed-- immigration law is constitutionally a Federal Issue...


Not entirely oldfool....your being stupid just makes the rest of us look so much better :D :D :D
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Larrry said:
Would suing Arizona fall under the category of immigration reform?

Nope- just following the Constitution... As the SCOTUS affirmed-- immigration law is constitutionally a Federal Issue...

Ok let's have it your way, then the Federal goverment is doing nothing
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Larrry said:
Would suing Arizona fall under the category of immigration reform?

Nope- just following the Constitution... As the SCOTUS affirmed-- immigration law is constitutionally a Federal Issue...

Not entirely:
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday delivered a split decision in the Obama administration's challenge to Arizona's aggressive immigration law, striking multiple provisions but upholding the "papers please" provision. Civil rights groups argue the latter measure, a centerpiece of S.B. 1070, invites racial profiling.
 
Top