Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
Here's a fascinating point about how Republicans talk about immigration from a Newsweek interview with New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, who's been mentioned on one occasion or another as a potential Vice Presidential nominee:
As we sit down at a local Starbucks, I ask about immigration. It’s a topic she has been reluctant to discuss since winning the Republican primary in 2010, so what comes next is surprising: a battle plan that contradicts nearly everything the GOP has been doing and saying since 2007, Romney’s “self-deportation” strategy included. “‘Self-deport?’ What the heck does that mean?” Martinez snaps. “I have no doubt Hispanics have been alienated during this campaign. But now there’s an opportunity for Gov. Romney to have a sincere conversation about what we can do and why.”
Naturally, Martinez has some suggestions. First, Republicans should remind Latinos that Obama pledged to pass comprehensive immigration reform by the end of his initial year in office, but “didn’t even have the courage to try.” Next, the GOP should outflank the president--on the left--by proposing its own comprehensive plan. “I absolutely advocate for comprehensive immigration reform,” Martinez says, , sipping a caramel macchiato. “Republicans want to be tough and say, ‘Illegals, you’re gone.’ But the answer is a lot more complex than that.” Martinez envisions an approach “with multiple levels”: increased border security; deportation for criminals; a guest-worker program for people who want “to go freely back and forth across the border to work”; a DREAM Act-style pathway to citizenship, through the military or college, for children brought here illegally by their parents; and a visa (coupled with a “penalty” or a “tagback”) that allows rest of the illegal population to remain in the U.S. while they follow standard naturalization procedures.
Martinez’s point is not that Republicans should peddle so-called “amnesty.” In New Mexico, she’s taken a lot of heat from Latinos for repeatedly pushing to repeal a state law that allows illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses; she also opposes a standalone DREAM Act, arguing that politicians can’t “fix [immigration] by saying, ‘Here’s the DREAM Act and we’re done. It has to be part of a larger plan.” She simply believes that a more pragmatic approach will help Republicans in the long run, particularly if it’s paired with the sort of issues-based appeal that inspired her to switch parties and a more aggressive campaign to recruit Hispanic candidates for local office. Maybe then the GOP can finally do what she did in her first statewide contest: approach the magic 40-percent mark among Latino voters. That alone would be enough to swing a presidential election.
“We’ve got to stop with the rhetoric,” Martinez says on her way out of Starbucks. “I’m so tired of the rhetoric. ‘Lower taxes,’ you know. ‘More opportunity.’ Da da da. It’s this five-liner of nothingness. There have to be some distinctions for people to latch onto.”
This last point is particularly key, and I wonder if it's been lost on too many of those on the right. Hispanics are often painted as communities of outreach met with a broad brush of aspiration and pablum. But in reality, the overlaps on specific policy issues should allow for much more targeted appeals. Martinez's dismissal of the "five liner of nothingness" is refreshing to hear from a Republican, and others would be wise to heed it.
- Comment (56)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
raycon
Do you mean small businesses violating not only the immigration laws, but engaged in undermining their own country?
And there are many ways the desires of small business for cheap help can be fulfilled short of undermining the poor of their own country. Want to dry up the demand tor illegals? The minimum wage would be a good place to start. Forcing the hand of small business toward innovation is another.
If a contractor here in CA has a choice between a skilled illegal who can lay sheet rock or tile, or paint for $20/hour OR a unionized worker who charges $40+, he'll obviously want to hire the non-unionized illegal laborer.
As a proponent of free markets, I believe in securing the rights of businesses to maximize their profit margins. One way California could do this is by implementing right-to-work laws. Another way would be for the Feds to institute immigration reform that allowed immigrants to work here legally.
Sep '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
To be continued.
Sep '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
The commenter who says “look how well the amnesty of 1986 worked” is ignoring a fundamental change. In those olden days, there was no practical way for an employer to check an applicant’s eligibility for employment. It would have required an army of government bureaucrats and a LOT of waiting time for employer and applicant. Today there are computers, the internet and databases linked together in the e-verify system. It ain’t perfect but it can be made to work.
Feb '11
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
Diane Ellis, Ed.
As a proponent of free markets, I believe in securing the rights of businesses to maximize their profit margins. One way California could do this is by implementing right-to-work laws. Another way would be for the Feds to institute immigration reform that allowed immigrants to work here legally. ·
Legal immigrants already can work here legally.
And I'd like to know: Is it in any way acceptable for the US government to limit the number foreigners allowed into the country?
Reading comments here, I get the impression that many people believe the answer is no.
That's a political loser with the public, and it explains why Bush wasn't able to push through his version of "comprehensive" immigration reform.
Everyone knew it was just another amnesty bill.
Jan '11
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
Xennady
Diane Ellis, Ed.
As a proponent of free markets, I believe in securing the rights of businesses to maximize their profit margins. One way California could do this is by implementing right-to-work laws. Another way would be for the Feds to institute immigration reform that allowed immigrants to work here legally. ·
Legal immigrants already can work here legally.
But illegal immigrants who do work here are doing so illegally, right?
I wonder if the work -- the fruits of this labor -- is positive in one instance and completely negative in the other.
Xennady
And I'd like to know: Is it in any way acceptable for the US government to limit the number foreigners allowed into the country?
Reading comments here, I get the impression that many people believe the answer is no
Limit the number? No. Not admit because of character, criminal history, and certain health conditions; sure. I believe that all people have a right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. You might counter that to secure these rights we need to institute government with the consent of the governed. If that's the case, are you consenting that government should limit the pursuits of others?
Apr '12
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
None of the ones I know-- possibly because I'm from an ag/animal husbandry background, and the "Hispanics" that I know who are citizens, and they're the ones that can't find work because they won't work under the table.
My vocabulary was greatly expanded by overhearing Jose, who I had a crush on, curse illegals and those who support them. Listen to guys like him for a while.
They get paid less because anyone who hires them, instead of illegals, has to pay a bunch of employment taxes; they get harassed by gangs of illegals because they are Americans, not Mexicans. "Helpful" shop clerks talk to them in a language they may not even know because they look Mexican. If they do know Spanish, their English is stunted because they were shoved through school with the illegals in ESL classes.
Feb '11
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
LowcountryJoe
But illegal immigrants who do work here are doing so illegally, right?
Yes.
LowcountryJoe
Limit the number? No.
You may as well have stopped typing right there.
The US government was set up to allow Americans to pursue life liberty, and happiness- and given powers to keep us secure from foreign interference. The power to raise armies and navies, etc.
It was not set up to allow everyone else on the planet to pursue life liberty and happiness- with the power to force Americans citizens to give them that opportunity.
I seek no power to prevent foreigners from pursuing life, liberty, etc elsewhere. But I object to the belief that the US government- maintained by taxes levied upon American citizens- has no power to limit immigration, as instructed by the will of the people as expressed thru elections.
The open borders idea is a political loser, because the people still don't want open orders.
Enough said.
Feb '11
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
Foxfier
They get paid less because anyone who hires them, instead of illegals, has to pay a bunch of employment taxes; they get harassed by gangs of illegals because they are Americans, not Mexicans. "Helpful" shop clerks talk to them in a language they may not even know because they look Mexican. If they do know Spanish, their English is stunted because they were shoved through school with the illegals in ESL classes.
This^^^^^^
Actual Americans of Mexican descent are getting screwed because the political class wants that cheap labor, and doesn't really care about anything else.
That's ugly . It's one of the many reasons why I think the US government has the same sort of issues the regime of Louis XVI had, and why establishment politicians like Dick Lugar keep losing.
I really hope elections can still solve this problem, lest we end up with the same fate as that French government of long ago.
May '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
John Marzan
Tone? What about the other side? Here's their latest gimmick. · 5 hours ago
Edited 5 hours ago
The other side isn't trying to make inroads against freebies, bad reputations (i.e., Krikorian clones), and the MSM. We are. Besides, just because someone else is a moronic jerk, there is no reason for us to descend to that level. We are the party of adults.
May '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
You can't- there is a Supreme Court precedent (Plyler v. Doe) on that based on alienage "protected class" status. You need a new SCOTUS to re-do its prior findings- good luck with that.
And it is likely that a law against birthright citizenship would also be struck down. What you can do, however, is limit chain immigration, which we almost did in 2007, till the anti-immigration purists (e.g., Malkin, et al) killed the bill.
May '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
James Of England
Duane Oyen:
Martinez's approach is almost 100% like GW Bush's approach, and what Jon Kyl was trying to effect when he was point man on the subject......
She's way to Bush's right on this. Notice what she's actually done; campaigned on a restrictionist platform for governor in the most Latino state in the country, implemented anti-immigration policies, and introduced, for the first time, fiscal sanity ............
James, with the greatest respect intended, your comment is not supported by the facts. Bush's immigration reform was 1) secure the border (he initially resisted the building the fence as part of that, then accepted Congress' position and embraced it wholeheartedly, waiving all the NEPA restrictions to accelerate it), 2) end chain immigration as currently practiced, 3) require development of fluency in English, and then 4) institute a guest worker program. Those match Martinez's proposals, along with stopping the ugly comments.
Oct '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
Duane Oyen
You can't- there is a Supreme Court precedent (Plyler v. Doe) on that based on alienage "protected class" status. You need a new SCOTUS to re-do its prior findings- good luck with that.
What is so controversial about denying non-citizens or illegals access to free public education? Plyler Doe was a narrow 5-4 decision. And how can you solve the illegal immigration problem if you don't overturn Plyler v Doe?
Edited on May 17, 2012 at 6:31amOct '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
"birthright citizenship" has been abused way too much already. I think eliminating this is a more humane way to deal with illegal immigration than fencing the entire U.S. mexico border.
Oct '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
Duane Oyen
James, with the greatest respect intended, your comment is not supported by the facts. Bush's immigration reform was 1) secure the border (he initially resisted the building the fence as part of that, then accepted Congress' position and embraced it wholeheartedly, waiving all the NEPA restrictions to accelerate it), 2) end chain immigration as currently practiced, 3) require development of fluency in English, and then 4) institute a guest worker program. Those match Martinez's proposals, along with stopping the ugly comments. · 7 hours ago
5) stop subsidizing their cost of living expenses.
Apr '12
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
John Marzan
5) stop subsidizing their cost of living expenses. · 10 hours ago
True.
Cracking down on benefit fraud would go a long ways to fixing this. (A lot of it could be caught by decent computerization...but that would put a lot of gov't workers out of business.)
May '10
Re: Susana Martinez on Republicans and Immigration
OK, John, I am fine with you mounting a campaign to repeal Plyler. Let me know when you get it taken care of. The Supreme Court doesn't tackle many such matters sua sponte so you need to find a case.
Meanwhile, tone matters.
(edit- John Marzan, not James of E.)
Edited on May 17, 2012 at 6:31pm