As we discussed earlier, today's been a big day for comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). Another Senate hearing has been scheduled for next week, an actual bill is supposed to be revealed any day now, and many thousands nationwide are now rallying for CIR. So of course, Governor Brian Sandoval (R) tried to make news by giving KINC, the Las Vegas Univision affiliate, an exclusive interview detailing his extensive flip-flopping evolution on the matter.
As the national media continues to regularly chronicle some national politician "evolving" on gay marriage, Nevada's governor is not joining the supposedly Darwinian progression on the issue: Brian Sandoval remains opposed to gay marriage, he told a Spanish-language interviewer in an exchange posted this week on the station's website.
Sandoval twice told Martha Saldaña that he opposes gay martriage, saying when she followed up, "As I said, marriage should be between a man and a woman." [...]
Exit polling last year showed nearly six in 10 Latinos [nationally] back gay marriage.
And not only that, but February's RAN poll commissioned by the conservative/Republican aligned firm Public Opinion Strategies showed Nevadans support marriage equality by a 54-43%. That's much higher than the razor-thin 45-44% result that the progressive/Democratic aligned firm Public Policy Polling showed in August 2011. So Nevadans are clearly evolving in favor of marriage equality along with the rest of America. So why on earth is Governor Sandoval still fighting against equality?
As we noted here before, even other Republicans are leaping at the opportunity to change their image on matters of equality. And it's even been happening quite close to home. In a major surprise late last month, (State) Senator Ben Kieckhefer (R-Reno) appeared at the SJR 13 hearing to testify in favor.
Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) made an appearance at the same hearing, and he later announced his support for SJR 13. And again, several other Republicans across the nation have suddenly announced their evolution on marriage equality. So what is Governor Sandoval waiting for?
As of late, media attention in Washington has been swirling around the latest manufactured crisis that's causing unnecessary economic headaches. However, there are still other topics being debated on Capitol Hill. One is comprehensive immigration reform (CIR).
Until this week, it looked like there was a strong bipartisan consensus to finally act on CIR. But all of a sudden, there's a major crack in that consensus. And his name is Jeb Bush.
The reaction to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s seeming flip-flop-flip on immigration has left many observers with the same reaction: What is he thinking? [...]
Needless to say, people are confused. “Wow,” Marshall Fitz, director of immigration policy at the liberal Center for American Progress, told TPM. Like other reform advocates, he was surprised that Bush,a longtime ally across the aisle, would shift on this.
As recently as Jan. 24, Bush favored a pathway to citizenship. “A practicable system of work-based immigration for both high-skilled and low-skilled immigrants —a system that will include a path to citizenship —will help us meet workforce needs, prevent exportation of jobs to foreign countries and protect against the exploitation of workers,” he wrote in an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal.
“Where the hell was this Jeb Bush during the campaign?” an unnamed Romney advisor told the Miami Herald. “He spent all this time criticizing Romney and it turns out he has basically the same position. So he wants people to go back to their country and apply for citizenship? Well, that’s self-deportation. We got creamed for talking about that. And now Jeb is saying the same thing.”
And the G-O-TEA base strikes again! Some think Jeb Bush flip-flopped in hopes of regaining lost viability in the 2016 Republican Presidential Primary. Others think this is just a ploy to sell books. Whatever the case, Bush is going against his own family in pandering to the xenophobic "tea party".
So far, lead pro-CIR Republican Senators John McCain (R-Arizona) and Marco Rubio (R-Florida) have been trying to spin away the implications of what just happened. However, another "Gang of 8" Republican is starting to worry.
That Rubio now must convince Bush to swing left on immigration represents an ironic role reversal for the two Florida politicians. Just a few months ago, it was Rubio who publicly opposed a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and Bush who explicitly favored the idea.
“I thought about that issue a lot and [went] back and forth on it before I signed on to my principles and I just concluded that it’s not good for the country in the long term to have millions and millions of people who are forever prohibited from becoming citizens,” Rubio told reporters on his way to a Senate vote. “That hasn’t worked out well for Europe.”
Responding to a question from TPM, Rubio said he did not think Bush’s surprise move would make it harder to convince conservatives to accept an eventual path to citizenship.
“I don’t think so — we have what we have,” Rubio said.
But Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), another member of the bipartisan Senate group working on a bill, expressed serious concern Tuesday about Bush’s rightward turn —especially given his prominent reputation as an immigration reformer.
“He has been a great voice on immigration, he’s been a good governor who understands the Hispanic community,” Graham told reporters. “I just think this proposal caught me off guard and it undercuts what we’re trying to do. I mean I can assure you the Hispanic community has always assumed that for the tradeoffs I’m seeking there will be a pathway to citizenship.”
All along, I figured CIR's biggest obstacle would come from recalcitrant House Republicans. Rubio, McCain, & Graham were hoping that leading conservatives like Bush would step in to guide enough to the "Gang of 8" deal to insure its passage. Yet instead, House G-O-TEA acolytes must be reveling in Bush joining them for the "tea party".
So does this mean Alex Pareene's prediction of CIR's brutal death in the House is starting to come to fruition? We don't know just yet. But at this point, the forecast is looking cloudy.
So far, Senator Dean Heller (R), Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson), and Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Carson City) have all signaled at least initial support for the "Gang of 8" plan. So we'll have to watch Nevada's own Republican Congresscritters to see what happens next to CIR on Capitol Hill. Will they stick with the likes of McCain & Rubio in hopes of rehabilitating the Nevada Republican Party's image among Latin@ voters while also finally achieving an unfulfilled promise to their big business supporters? Or will they cave to the teabaggers and flip-flop like Jeb Bush just did?
The fate of immigration reform may now lie in their hands.
Last week, we took a closer look at Republicans struggling to find common ground and common purpose on immigration reform. Last night, Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) tried to carefully "thread the needle" on comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) at his Henderson town hall. He acknowledged receiving plenty of lobby pressure by the extreme anti-immigrant Numbers USA. And perhaps in tipping his hat to them, he proclaimed his continuing opposition to the great threat of "amnesty" that absolutely no one on Capitol Hill is proposing.
So far, the only major difference between the "Gang of 8" plan that Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) is touting and President Obama's CIR plan that he rolled out here in Southern Nevada late last month is that Obama's plan has more specifics. Perhaps that's why Heck refused to endorse either of the twin CIR proposals last night. However, he also didn't rule out CIR.
And perhaps in the biggest stunner of the night, Heck said he can support the earned citizenship proposal at the heart of both Obama's plan and the "Gang of 8" plan.
Numbers USA wasn't the only group that's been lobbying Heck on immigration. DREAM Big Vegas has been pushing Heck and Senator Dean Heller to support CIR. They've been succeeding with Heller, they found a surprise with Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Carson City), and it now looks like Heck is next. With Heck's CIR announcement last night, there's now the possibility of the entire Nevada Congressional Delegation uniting to support a CIR bill. (All 3 Democrats, Reid, Titus, & Horsford, strongly support CIR.)
Clearly, the changing demographic reality of Nevada and the nation are finally weighing on all of Nevada's Congressional Republicans. In addition, both business and labor in this state and nationally have been calling for CIR for some time as it makes economic sense. It sounds like Joe Heck is now listening.
Yet at the same time, some "tea party" backed Republicans have offered their own anti-CIR plan. And a few top G-O-TEA politicians are even admitting that they just don't want to support anything that Obama supports. So it may still not be easy to get Heck fully on board with CIR, but at least there's now a real possibility.
For nearly a decade, comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) has been an elusive policy goal on Capitol Hill. Politicians on both sides have attempted to reach a solution. But whenever Congress seemingly came close to a solution, the radical right led an opposition campaign to kill it.
So far this year, we've been wondering if this time will be different. On one hand, there's a new push from (some elements of) the (center-)right to finally make CIR happen. The Republican establishment knows it's on the wrong side of America's demographic evolution, and it knows the business establishment wants CIR so it can better function in the globalized economy.
However, the radical right opposition is still there. And not only is it there, but it's become even more intense in the "tea party" era. As much as the Republican establishment here in Nevada and in DC would rather deny her existence, the spirit of Sharron Angle lives on. And she represents the heart of the current Republican Party.
It's the very heart that Mitt Romney constantly appealed to during his Presidential campaign last year.
And already, many House Republicans have begun lining up against the new Senate CIR proposal.
But House Republicans already have started expressing concerns about a key idea in the Senate framework that, once the border is deemed secure, would provide a pathway to citizenship for many of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. U.S. Rep. Raúl Labrador, an Idaho Republican involved in House immigration-reform talks, told NPR last week that he doesn’t think his fellow House Republicans would support a citizenship path, although he would be in favor of legalizing their status.
“Statements from the House make it more difficult,” [Senator Jeff] Flake [R-Arizona, and a CIR "Gang of 8" member], a former six-term House member, told The Arizona Republic Thursday in an interview. “Staking out that kind of ground early on without really seeing what the legislation looks like.”
Flake said he is optimistic that the GOP-led House will embrace the bipartisan Senate approach, including a path to citizenship, once a bill is introduced and lawmakers can learn the specific steps undocumented immigrants would have to go through to get a green card. In broad terms, they will have to pass background checks, pay back taxes and fines, learn English and wait in line, according to the Senate outline.
“Once they see the legislation, once they see the length of time, the requirements and everything else, I think we can convince people that this is the way to go,” Flake said. “I hope they keep their powder dry until they see it.”
On Friday, Flake reiterated to The Republic’s editorial board that he views House Republicans as the biggest potential roadblock, saying immigration-reform advocates need “a significant number of Republicans to support it in the House.”
Even their fellow Republicans are becoming concerned that sustained G-O-TEA opposition may yet derail CIR... Again. Will this time be different?
Only if enough Republicans decide it's in their long-term best interest to actually reach a realistic solution to the nation's immigration problems. And CIR advocates have found another glimmer of hope here in Nevada. Apparently, Senator Dean Heller (R-Metamorphosis) may not be the only Nevada Republican to change his tune on immigration. The man who succeeded him in the House seat he used to fill may be following suit.
“I’ve always been for improvements in border security,” [Rep. Mark] Amodei [R-Carson City] said. “And I am not convinced that guest workers are a bad thing. We should have a pathway for people who to come and work. You can’t assume that everyone who comes wants to be a citizen.”
But unlike many members of his party, Amodei is amenable to the idea of a pathway to citizenship — and says an entry program that doesn’t respect the principle of family reunification is a nonstarter.
“I’m willing to look at that — if all you’ve done is broken the immigration law, to be able to earn your way to a state where you can apply for citizenship,” Amodei said. “To come out and say, ‘First and foremost, we’re going to break up your family’? That’s probably not a great first move.”
Being from rural Northern Nevada, Amodei might not seem like the most natural candidate among Nevada lawmakers to take a lead role on issues concerning immigrants, who are clustered more closely in urban Southern Nevada.
But Amodei points out that Hispanics make up 25 percent of his district.
“It’s 1 in 4. No matter how you do the math, that’s a major piece of your constituency, that’s a major interest,” he said. “I think I have as much interest in this as anybody.”
So Amodei is now in play. That just leaves Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) as the one remaining Nevada Member of Congress who hasn't (yet) revealed his hand on immigration. And it reveals how at least some Nevada Republicans want to diffuse immigration as the "wedge issue" that continues to hurt their standing among minority communities, especially Latin@s and Asian-Americans.
But again, how do they overcome the continuing "TEA" fueled opposition to CIR from their own party? How do they move past Sharron Angle, Mitt Romney, Kris Kobach, and Joe Arpaio? Can the G-O-TEA bloc finally be defeated on this issue?
The key to unlock CIR may ultimately be found in last month's "Fiscal Cliff" deal. As long as Amodei and 20+ more House Republicans are willing to make the jump, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) may just have to let them join the vast majority of House Democrats in passing CIR. "The Hastert Rule" will be broken again, but so will the logjam that's constantly killed reform in the 11th hour before.
So can it happen? Will it finally happen? How serious are Republicans in coming to the table to let it happen? Are they willing to actually work with Democrats to enact the broad consensus the American people have already said that they want to happen?
First, Congressional Republicans must finally put aside their xenophobic ghosts from campaigns past and look to the future.
Ah, the times... They are a changin'. I wonder if Bob Dylan ever saw this coming.
The Nevada Republican Party has come out in favor of immigration reform including a path to citizenship.
That's what The Atlantic's (and former Nevada based reporter) Molly Ball just tweeted. I wonder why they released this statement today. I'm sure it has nothing to do with providing cover for Dean Heller, and potentially Joe Heck, to support comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). (/snark)
“Why the sudden change, Republicans?” Jon Stewart said. “Perhaps you looked into your hearts and realized that people who are willing to risk prison or worse just to do our least glamorous, most dangerous work deserve at least a basic level of humanity.”
Or, as Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) put it recently, Republicans lost the Hispanic vote badly in 2012.
“Okay, or that,” Stewart said. “That’s another reason. Craven political calculation to squeeze out enough votes to make Nevada competitive again. Okay, that’s okay, too. Not sure that’s the reason you’re supposed to say out loud, but you’ve come a long way. Well, you’ve come a way. Yes, the arc of history is long, but it bends toward shamelessness.”
Party leaders must be waking up & smelling the political napalm. They don't want to be seen as obstructing progress. And they don't want to risk forever alienating the vast majority of Latin@ voters.
However, there's a problem with their plan. Their base still wants nothing to do with CIR.
Echoing the 47 percent rhetoric that plagued Mitt Romney during the election, immigration opponents have panned the Senate framework for a tough road to legalization as “amnesty” or a “pointless” attempt to attract Latinos to the Republican party.
Many of these groups played a role in defeating the last attempt at immigration reform in 2007. Numbers USA, a group founded by anti-immigration activist John Tanton, slammed the Senate discussions as “amnesty 2.0″ and pledged to defeat it, while another of Tanton’s groups, FAIR, directed membership to tell Congress “how ridiculous it is.”
The National Review rejected immigration reform as “pointless” in a staff editorial, where they claimed Hispanics would never be welcomed in the Republican party [...]
Some Republican lawmakers have rejected reform, as well. Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) called Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) “naive” and “nuts” to allow a path for legalization, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) took a predictably similar hard line. As the House begins to craft its own plan, longtime reform opponents Lamar Smith (R-TX), the former House Judiciary Chair and Lou Barletta (R-PA) claimed it amounted to “amnesty.”
As we've discussed before, the "TEA" driven Republican base still can't stand CIR. And it may still cause a major obstacle in the House. That's why national Republican leaders have been trying desperately to quell "tea party" anger and extremism on immigration. But will assurances from the likes of Marco Rubio and John McCain be enough to stop the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter from stirring up "tea party" opposition to CIR? This is the dilemma that both Nevada Republicans and national Republicans still face.
And then, there's the actual policy behind the politics. While some Republican politicians suddenly want to look "moderate" on CIR, it's still an open question as to how they will actually vote. Take, for instance, what John McCain has actually said about addressing the plight of LGBTQ families in what's supposed to be comprehensive immigration reform.
The United States is home to at least 28,500 same-sex couples in which one partner is a citizen and the other is not, but federal law does not recognize these relationships and prohibits gay and lesbian couples from seeking visas on the basis of same-sex unions. The Obama administration’s framework would allow couples to apply for visas on the basis of their permanent unions, while the bipartisan senate principles do not.
“I think it is a red herring. I think then, do we want to guarantee a tax payer free abortion?” McCain asked in response to a question about the provision from Politico’s Mike Allen. “I’m telling you now, if you love this up with social issues and things that are controversial, the it will endanger the issue. ”
He added, “I’ll be glad to talk about, discuss it, what the ramifications are, but if someone does that as the most important aspect of comprehensive immigration reform, then we just have a fundamental disagreement.” “Which is more important, LGBT or border security?” McCain finally said.
Oh yes, he actually said that. Is he really that dense? Sorry, but this makes me question just how committed he and these other Republican "Gang of 8" Senators actually are to comprehensive immigration reform. Couple this with what Marco Dubious told Rush Limbaugh said about earned citizenship earlier this week, and we at least have some yellow flags worth monitoring.
And this may very well add to Dean Heller's dilemma. Earlier today, Harry Reid met with President Obama to discuss CIR. He's apparently cool with the President's blueprint, and the "Gang of 8" Democrats will face pressure from progressives who'd like for their plan to adhere closely to it. If progressives succeed on matters like a real pathway to citizenship and addressing LGBTQ immigrants, will Heller still support the bill? Or will he fall prey to the "tea party" siren song of "NO ILLEGALS!!!"?
So are Nevada Republicans truly evolving on CIR? And for that matter, are national Republicans? Their recent flowery language will be put to the test this spring.
That didn't take long. Just hours after the revelation of the "Gang of 8" Senate immigration deal and hours before President Obama returns to Nevada to reveal his own blueprint for comprehensive immigration reform (CIR), a familiar voice is now chiming in. Guess who's been "evolving" on immigration.
“It is encouraging to see President Obama, Senate Democrats and Senate Republicans commit to passing reforms that will create an orderly immigration process for those wishing to take part in the American Dream. For far too long, many in Washington have focused on the twenty percent where Democrats and Republicans disagree. We are making progress towards a proposal that focuses on the 80 percent where both sides of the aisle can come to an agreement.
“Since November, I have had several conversations with Senator Rubio, as well as discussions with Senator Graham, Senator Flake and Representative Raúl Labrador about my views on comprehensive immigration reform. This bipartisan group of Senators has provided a reasonable starting point for Republicans and Democrats to work together. I support many of the principles included in this plan, and look forward to reviewing specific details in the weeks and months ahead. As the President prepares to release his own ideas for immigration reform, it is my hope that he looks to this bipartisan proposal as a blueprint for his plans moving forward."
What a difference a statewide campaign makes. Remember when Senator Dean Heller (R-46%) toed the "tea party" line in opposing CIR? This sounds like someone who had to do some "soul searching" after winning his election by fewer than 13,000 votes and with much less than 50%.
All of a sudden, Capitol Hill is buzzing with confidence that a deal will be made. And with Dean Heller now firmly on board, immigration reformers may finally be on the cusp of securing the 60+ votes needed for CIR to clear the Senate. And though immigrant rights activists are still concerned about what will happen in the "sausage making process" of crafting the specific language of this bill, many are feeling increasingly optimistic about 2013 becoming the year of immigration reform.
Advocates describe the senators’ framework as the biggest bipartisan breakthrough publicly released since 2007, when President George Bush’s immigration overhaul died in Congress. Like Bush’s plan, the senators’ supports steps to legalization that are “contingent upon securing our borders” and enforcing visa overstays, which must be accomplished before any undocumented immigrant receives a green card. Advocates say that’s the most meaningful part of the plan but also the one that raises the most questions.
Their concern is that the conditions for gaining citizenship could wind up being so stringent that undocumented immigrants could remain in legal limbo for the indeterminate future. “Is this citizenship in name only?If so, there is going to be some pretty dramatic backlash,” says Mary Giovagnoli, director of the Immigration Policy Center.
The proposal, for example, calls for border security to “apprehend every unauthorized entrant,” which has raised some eyebrows. “If that’s going to be the standard, that’s essentially an unrealistic, impossible standard to meet,” says [Greg Chen, director of advocacy for the American Immigration Lawyers Association].
Advocates are hopeful, however, that the senators’ intent is to make the plan workable and not create an endless, open-ended timeframe for legalization. Bush’s 2007 plan, for instance, set up similar triggers for gaining citizenship. According to Giovagnoli, experts estimated at the time that clearing out the backlog of visas would take about eight years. And this new blueprint, on its face, suggests that legislators might be willing to push a bill that’s more generous than the 2007 plan.
There was some concern this morning about the "trigger" for permanent legal status, but so far it looks like Senate Democrats are determined to ensure no "second class citizen" status results from this legislation.
So are we finally approaching a breakthrough on CIR? Not so fast, says Salon's Alex Pareene. He still thinks House Republicans will likely kill the bill. Remember them?
The problem comprehensive immigration reform ran into last time is that Republicans don’t want it. The business community wants it, obviously, but Republicans forced to choose between donors and their right-wing white constituents are generally more terrified of pissing off their constituents. Right-wing nativism has declined a bit since its recent height in 2010, but it’s still arguably worse than it was in 2006, when mass conservative revolt killed the last deal.
As all of America’s recent legislative fights have shown, House Republicans are protected from national anti-conservative trends by very safe and conservative districts. They are more vulnerable to getting primaried than they are to losing to moderates or Democrats in a general election. A majority of Americans may now support a path to citizenship,but a majority of Americans also support hiking taxes on the rich, and the GOP nearly shut down the government rather than agree to that. [...]
[... T]he entire deal rests on Speaker John Boehner again bringing a major, controversial bill to the floor without a majority of Republican support, and relying on Democratic votes for its passage. I’m not sure he can do that again without ending his career. I imagine he’d be perfectly fine with killing whatever the Senate passes and allowing his caucus to pass some sort of “flying border drones and giant fences only” version of “immigration reform” instead.
Personally, I'm not so pessimistic. I wouldn't underestimate either the power of public opinion or Republicans' instinct for political survival. But then again, the latter presents a real pickle for Republican Members of Congress. Do they back CIR and risk "tea party" backlash? Or do they kill CIR and risk further alienating minority communities?
This is where Joe Heck and Mark Amodei step in. Will they back CIR? That will ultimately determine both the future of this legislation... And the future of the Republican Party.
What a difference an election makes. Just hours before President Obama comes to Southern Nevada to pitch his immigration reform proposal, a "gang of 8" US Senators jumped ahead of Obama in releasing their own "grand bargain" on immigration reform.
The Senate plan is more conservative than President Obama's proposal, which he plans to unveil Tuesday in a speech in Las Vegas. But its provisions for legalizing millions of undocumented immigrants go further than measures that failed to advance in Congress in previous years — a reminder of how swiftly the politics of immigration have shifted since Latino voters' strong influence in the November election. [...]
The Senate proposal would allow most of those in the country illegally to obtain probationary legal status immediately by paying a fine and back taxes and passing a background check. That would make them eligible to work and live in the U.S. They could earn a green card — permanent residency — after the government certifies that the U.S.-Mexican border has become secure, but might face a lengthy process before becoming citizens.
Obama is expected to push for a faster citizenship process that would not be conditional on border security standards being met first. The structure of the citizenship process will probably be among the most hotly debated parts of any immigration plan.
Less-controversial provisions would tighten requirements on employers to check the immigration status of new workers; increase the number of visas for high-skilled jobs; provide green cards automatically to people who earn master's degrees or PhDs in science, technology or math at U.S. universities; and create an agricultural guest-worker program.
At first, this seems like a reasonable deal. However, there may be a nasty devil in the details that needs to be further examined. Under this deal, about 9 million undocumented immigrants won't even receive permanent legal status until the border has been "certified as secure". The federal government has spent $187 billion on border security since then-President Ronald Reagan signed the last immigration overhaul in 1986. And under Obama's first term, Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) deported a record number of immigrants. How much more must we spend on border security until the border is "certified as secure"?
Perhaps this is a good faith effort at bipartisan compromise and deal-making. But what if it isn't? Are at least some Republicans hoping that this commission never officially declares a "secure" US/Mexico Border? I'm sure immigrant rights activists will be looking at this provision very closely to see how workable this really is. They will probably also be listening closely to President Obama's Las Vegas speech tomorrow to make sure he's committed to ensuring no permanent "second class citizenship" status is created.
Yet despite this yellow flag for the left, it still looks like the bigger danger for CIR (comprehensive immigration reform) lies with the right. As we've discussed before, Republicans' "tea party" base have been dead set against any kind of CIR. Will Senator Marco Rubio's (R-Florida) seal of approval change that? Or will they lump him in with Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) as a "sellout"?
And how will Senator Dean Heller (R-46%) & Rep. Joe Heck (R-"TEA" Curious) respond to this new development? Heller has already been "moderating" his language on immigration since he barely won reelection last fall (and lost the Latin@ vote 2-1). And Heck has been trying to strike a balance between his "TEA" fueled base and the political realities of NV-03. What will they say after Obama's unveiling of his plan, especially after this Senate proposal has been revealed?
There now looks to be a mad rush for CIR on Capitol Hill. Harry Reid's big goal may finally be coming to fruition, and one of President Obama's key campaign promises may finally come close to being fulfilled. But again, the devils may be truly be in the details. Just how workable is this new Senate deal? And can any Senate deal survive John Boehner's dysfunctional "tea party" plagued House?
The President will probably have all of this and more on his mind when he returns to Nevada tomorrow.
Next week, President Obama will be returning to Las Vegas. And he'll be talking immigration reform. Even as Congress seems to be talking up various immigration bills, President Obama will be making his case directly to the American people. And that effort will begin here in Southern Nevada.
President Barack Obama announced after a meeting with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus [CHC] on Friday that he will lay out some of his plans for immigration reform [CIR] on Tuesday in Las Vegas.
Members of the caucus who were present at the meeting said Obama assured them that he shares the group's basic beliefs about immigration reform, most notably that making a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants -- which some Republicans oppose -- is an absolute must as they push for legislation.
"The President was pleased to hear from CHC members and noted that they share the same vision, including that any legislation must include a path to earned citizenship," the administration in a statement. "The President further noted that there is no excuse for stalling or delay." [...]
The members of the caucus said in statements after the meeting that they laid out their principles and were told by the White House that the ideas align with the administration's planned policies.
"[W]e have made it crystal clear that any bill that does not include a pathway to earned citizenship will not have our support," Hinjosa said. "In the next few weeks and months, the CHC will remain committed to CIR and dedicate all our efforts to ensure legislation will make it to President Obama's desk."
The Associated Press reported that the White House will launch an effort on immigration next week,as will a bipartisan group of senators, likely the so-called "gang of eight" -- four Republicans, four Democrats -- who have already begun to work toward a deal.
The Hispanic Caucus wanted to ensure that President Obama is committed to CIR, and the President did just that. Already, top Congressional Republicans are changing their tune... Again. Even after inching towards supporting CIR earlier this month, they now seem to be reverting to form in advocating "second class citizenship" again. Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) even called on Democrats to denounce unions (??!!) because they're advocating a pathway to real citizenship.
This is probably why President Obama is taking it to the streets. With some Republicans in Congress again playing political games with millions of families' lives, he wants the people to turn up the pressure on Members of Congress to do the right thing. And he actually already has the vast majority of the American people on his side.
A solid 77 percent of voters favor a full package of immigration reforms, including a roadmap to citizenship, according to a poll of 1,000 voters conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a Republican polling firm, and Hart Research Associates, a Democratic firm. The poll --sponsored by Service Employees International Union, America's Voice Education Fund, and National Immigration Forum -- confirms our strong belief that fixing the broken immigration system is not just a Latino priority, but also a high priority for the American people. A long-lasting program with accountability and a path to citizenship is what voters want; and it is not the third rail of politics that politicians have long feared. [...]
In every region of our nation -- north, east, west and the conservative South, where states such as Alabama and Georgia approved racial profiling, anti-immigrant laws -- voters say they are more likely to vote for their member of Congress if the member has voted for the complete reform plan that has been outlined. Republicans and Democrats want their representatives to vote for immigration reform and consider it a high priority, even with all other major issues Congress has on its plate.
The respondents also rejected the argument advanced by opponents that the immigration reform would allow immigrants to take jobs away from Americans. Instead, 60 percent of White voters, 61 percent of African American voters, and 71 percent of Latino voters agreed that America is stronger when immigrants get legal, pay taxes, and become part of society.
We already know Harry Reid considers CIR as one of his top priorities in the 113th Congress. It just remains to be seen if Dean Heller will come on board, and if there's any chance of Joe Heck or Mark Amodei coming on board. That's probably why President Obama is coming here first to tout immigration reform.
It already looks like Republicans are again fearing "tea party" blowback for backing CIR. But as we've discussed before, they likely have even more to lose by killing it in Congress. That's something Dean Heller and other Nevada Republicans must keep in mind as President Obama returns to Nevada next week. Do they really want to alienate Latinos and other minority communities to the point of becoming a "permanent minority party" here and nationally?
Earlier this week, we noted the renewed push for comprehensive immigration reform. Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Searchlight) talked to The Sun's Tovin Lapan about what he expects in a comprehensive immigration reform bill. After all, he runs the Senate floor.
“There will be nothing done in my Senate (on immigration reform) without a pathway to citizenship,” he said. [...]
“We have spent a huge amount of money on border security, and both our northern and southern borders are more secure,” Reid said. “Frankly, Mexico is doing much better economically, and that has helped the issue a lot. We can’t build a fence of 3,000 miles because no matter how high we build it, they can build a ladder taller than that fence. So I think we have about expended our energy on border security.”
Reid said immigration reform was one of his top two issues for this session. Currently, Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., are working on a bipartisan proposal they hope to unveil by the end of this month.
“People will have to move to the back of line. They would have to pay some penalties and fines, and they have to work, stay out of trouble and work on speaking English,” said Reid, offering general principles for a pathway to citizenship for immigrants without legal residency. “That would bring people out of the shadows and really help everybody. It would be good for family reunification.”
Reid, who credits his 2010 re-election to Hispanic support, said he had no issue with E-Verify, the federal system for employers to check the immigration status of job applicants, but that it would have to be used much more widely to be effective.
“We have to make the employer sanctions not a Catch-22,” he said. “No one can do it right. If you are an employer, you have trouble, and if you are an employee, you have trouble. So these are some of the things we need to work on that are totally doable if there is a will. That’s why I hope McCain sticks with it, because it will be a great legacy for him.”
We've seen the results of the current broken system. The federal government keeps spending more and more on "border security". Yet the system remains broken.
During the 2012 fiscal year, the federal government spent more on immigration enforcement —$18 billion —than on every other federal law enforcement agencies combined, according to a new report from the Migration Policy Institute. The spending on Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection dwarfs the combined $14.4 billion spent on the FBI; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Drug Enforcement Administration and U.S. Secret Service.
The U.S. has spent more than $187 billion on immigration enforcement since President Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act in 1986 —which first made it illegal for employers to hire undocumented workers along with strengthening U.S. border security. Adjusted for inflation, the U.S. now spends 15 times as much on immigration enforcement as it did in the mid-1980s. And the number of deportations and immigration-related prosecutions has also jumped along with the increased spending[...]
But the high costs and increasing number of deportations continue to show exactly why Congress needs to address comprehensive immigration reform, including a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. With comprehensive reform that provides a path to citizenship, the U.S. would see a cumulative $1.5 trillion to the U.S. gross domestic product —the largest measure of economic growth —over 10 years in addition to $4.5 billion to $5.4 billion in additional net tax revenue over just three years if the 11 million undocumented immigrants were legalized.
This is why Senator Reid and President Obama continue to insist on truly comprehensive reform that includes a pathway to citizenship. It simply makes economic sense. And yes, it makes security sense.
And for a growing number of Republicans, it's finally making political sense. Perhaps most don't want to admit it, but they've also been stung by Colin Powell's cogent condemnation of their recent "minority outreach". Keep in mind that Powell was George W. Bush's first Secretary of State.
Any wonder why Senator Dean Heller (R-46%) has changed his tune on immigration over the past year? And he's not alone. Some prominent Republicans are even vowing to put their money where their mouths are on immigration reform.
On Thursday, [Former Commerce Secretary Carlos] Gutierrez held a press conference in Washington, D.C., with a group of leading business, religious, and law enforcement officials announcing a combined effort to pressure lawmakers into backing immigration reform.
“Business, badges, and bibles,” Gutierrez told reporters. “I think all three of those groups could have done more in 2007.”
The leaders who were gathered at the event took care to stress that they expected both parties to do their part and for the White House to keep guns and budget fights from delaying reform. But lest there be any confusion over the intended audience for their own campaign, the organizers provided a nine-page packet of recent quotes from exclusively conservative politicians, activists, and pundits — everyone from Rep. Paul Ryan to Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade — expressing support for reforming immigration laws.
Gutierrez is doing more than just speaking out on the issue. He’s creating a super PAC dedicated to supporting Republican politicians willing to back a bill legalizing undocumented immigrants and reforming the immigration system. This is especially important in the House, where Republicans have been quieter on the topic, individual members are more insulated from the Latino voting bloc, and leadership has a weak hold over its caucus.
“We’re going to do something that hasn’t been done in the past: we’re going to put money behind the problem,” Gutierrez said, adding his organization will “give cover to people to come out and admit they are for immigration reform.”
Gutierrez said his fellow organizers haven’t decided whether their super PAC, Republicans for Immigration Reform, might be used on offense to target anti-immigration politicians in primaries as well.
As we've noted before, Republicans' "TEA" powered base still refuse to even consider comprehensive reform. It remains to be seen how pro-reform Republicanos try to work around and past "tea party" opposition to virtually anything and everything that isn't further militarization of the border & mass deportations.
Yet despite this, there finally seems to be a convergence on matters of immigration reform. For the first time in decades, we're seeing a critical mass coalesce behind comprehensive immigration reform. The broad majority of Americans support comprehensive reform. Economic & fiscal concerns demand reform. Both Harry Reid and Barack Obama won their last (respective) campaigns on the promise of delivering reform. And now, we're seeing at least some Republicans recognize the new political reality by demanding reform.
So will it happen? Or is this the better question: Who can afford for it not to happen?
Today on KNPR, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Searchlight) discussed a variety of issues. One happened to be an issue that attracted quite a bit of attention last year... Especially once it bit Republicans in the behind last fall. It may not have been front and center in recent weeks, but comprehensive immigration reform will likely soon take center stage in the 113th Congress.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is currently working with a group of Republicans and Democrats in the Senate to craft legislation, but until recently avoided calls for a broad immigration bill that would grant a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Instead, he suggested a series of smaller bills, an idea that Democrats and the White House have long dismissed as a nonstarter. But over the weekend, Rubio told the Wall Street Journal that while he still prefers a series of bills, his broader plan resembles the general framework favored by most Democrats and immigration reformers: a path to citizenship, increased visas for high-tech workers, a system for bringing in temporary agricultural workers, and a crackdown on employers who hire undocumented workers.
It’s all still very vague and the White House and Senate have yet to produce a specific bill of their own to compare it to. But while Rubio stressed that his plan “is not blanket amnesty or a special pathway to citizenship,” he made clear that the legislation he had in mind would strive to ensure that the undocumented population is not left in legal limbo indefinitely. Given that Rubio has toyed with bills that might have stopped short of citizenship before, this is a significant move. And the types of requirements he mentioned might be necessary to gain permanent residency and eventually citizenship — such as passing a criminal background check, paying a fine and back taxes — sounded largely in line with Democratic proposals. Should he abandon his insistence on passing legislation in a series of bills, there may not be a ton of distance between him and Senate Democrats.
“It’s not good for our country to have people trapped in this status forever,” Rubio said. “It’s been a disaster for Europe.”
In another significant development, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), announced on Facebook that he agreed with Rubio’s proposal. The House is expected to be a tough sell for immigration reform and Ryan, who recently told a leading pro-immigration Democrat that he’s interested in reform, could prove an important leader if he fully embraces the Senate’s efforts at a bipartisan compromise.
“Senator Rubio is exactly right on the need to fix our broken immigration system,” Ryan wrote. “I support the principles he’s outlined: modernization of our immigration laws; stronger security to curb illegal immigration; and respect for the rule of law in addressing the complex challenge of the undocumented population. Our future depends on an immigration system that works.”
Rubio and Ryan must have seen the writing on Mitt Romney's wall. And they no longer want to be haunted by the political ghosts of Kris Kobach, Joe Arpaio, and Nevada's own Sharron Angle. So now, they suddenly want to take part in crafting comprehensive reform.
Already, Senator Dean Heller (R-46%) has at least publicly changed his tune on matters of immigration. It now looks like more prominent Republicans may be joining him. However, they still have an incredibly difficult task ahead of them in explaining all this to the G-O-TEA base who still stand with the likes of Angle, Arpaio, and Kobach in their anti-immigrant xenophobia.
At this point, it's become painfully obvious to everyone living in the real world that we can't continue to force 12-14 million people to live in the nation's shadows. And not only would it be inhumane to deport them all, but it would also be incredibly expensive and logistically impossible. There's always been support for comprehensive immigration reform. But now that some Republican leaders fear for the future of their party (if they continue to scare away Latin@s and other minority communities), they may finally be ready to deal.
But will this be enough to make something happen in Congress? That remains to be seen. But if anyone can find a way to count all the way to passage, it's Harry Reid.
Last night, Jon Ralston had State Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis (D-North Las Vegas) and State Senator Ruben Kihuen (D-Las Vegas) on his show to discuss yesterday's startling turn of events. Believe it or not, we've seen even more twists and turns in the past 18 hours.
(Skip to 19:30 to start the Denis/Kihuen segment.)
Just as I had expected earlier, someone else is quickly jumping on this bandwagon. All of a sudden, State Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) also wants "driver's privilege cards" for undocumented immigrants. And he may even introduce his own bill for it!
On Tuesday, Roberson voiced strong support for a Utah-style driver’s privilege card for undocumented immigrants, adding that the Republican caucus may come out with its own proposal soon.
“A lot of immigrants in Nevada are on the roads now, whether it’s to get back and forth to school or get children back and forth to school or to go to work,” Roberson said. “The fact that these immigrants may be driving without a license or card and without insurance, I think we can do better than that as a state.”
So there's now bipartisan consensus here. So is all well? Not for Nevada Republicans. Chuck Muth eviscerated Roberson (again) on his blog last weekend for "Hispandering" (nice one, Chuckie) already, so he probably isn't liking this. And so far, other top Republicans in Carson City may be more inclined to side with Muth.
Sen. Don Gustavson, R-Reno, one of the Legislature’s most conservative Republicans, was dismayed by the idea of granting driving privileges to undocumented immigrants.
“I would not be supportive just letting people come in the country illegally and giving them a driver’s license. No!” he said. “It doesn’t make sense to allow them to come in the country illegally then give permission to drive legally.”
As we had discussed yesterday, the "tea party" base of the Republican Party has no interest in moderation. Hell, Chuck Muth is now vitriolically referring to it as "Hispandering"! And the likes of Don Gustavson and Pat Hickey seem eager to fight Roberson on this.
And speaking of Hickey, he stirred the pot some more yesterday by continuing his false equivalency argument for voter ID. As Mo Denis said above, there is a huge difference between utilizing resources to solve a serious problem (uninsured and unlicensed drivers on the road) and spending money to "solve" a nonexistent problem (as in the great "VOTER FRAUD!!!" hoax). But shortly after saying this, Denis announced something that probably won't sound like music to Ross Miller's ears. So now, both incoming Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick (D-North Las Vegas) and incoming State Senate Majority Mo Denis have announced opposition to Ross Miller's election reform bill!
While Republicans are split over tackling legal status for immigrant drivers, Democrats are now split over election reform. And thanks to Pat Hickey stirring the pit, both issues are starting to look like a tangled mess. At least Denis and Roberson won't need Assembly Republican votes to pass some sort of legislation clearing the way for some sort of driver's licenses for immigrant drivers. However, Ross Miller will definitely need more Democratic support to pass his election reform legislation. And so far, top Democrats just don't see the need for it... And Republican meddling may very well be harming Miller's chances of coalescing Democratic support for it.
So far, the Nevada Legislature is looking increasingly "all shook up"... And it isn't even in session yet!
A little earlier, we were wondering if Nevada Republicans could really change by dropping the xenophobia that scares away Latin@ and other minority voters. Now, we're starting to get a better sense of the answer. And top Republicans probably won't like it. And they have one of their own to thank for it!
Assembly Minority Leader Pat Hickey, R-Reno, is considering supporting Nevada's proposed state-issued drivers license for U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Deferred Action program but is confused by State Democrat Leaders who are opposing a similar program to improve the quality of Nevada's election process.
Democrat lawmakers are currently drafting a bill that grants all residents, legal and illegal, a "Drivers Privilege Card," in hopes that it will make Nevada's roads safer for everyone.
"On one hand, Democrats are proposing photo IDs for illegal residents in Nevada in order to makes our roads safer," said Assemblyman Hickey. "If photo IDs are a good idea for illegal residents on our highways-then they should also be a good idea for legal ones in our voting booths," continued Assemblyman Hickey.
As if right on queue, Pat Hickey arrives to rain plenty of strong "TEA" on other Republicans' "No Really, We Like Latinos!" parade. Just as we had feared, the "tea party" base just won't read the memo.
And in case that was not enough, Hickey's enigmatic press release is fueling even more intrigue. Will Ross Miller's proposed election reform legislation provide enough voter ID to Pat Hickey's liking? Or is he still pursuing outright voter suppression?
The only thing that's clear at this point is that Pat Hickey is preparing to blow up the nascent effort led by Brian Sandoval and Michael Roberson to engage in Latino voter outreach... And look more "moderate" & attractive to the overall electorate while they're at it. And since Ralston is correct that Assembly Democrats won't need Republican votes there to pass a bill allowing for undocumented immigrants to access some kind of driver's license, this will probably just sting Republicans exactly when they wanted to start healing.
But again, there's another element to this story that can't be ignored. Just how much of a push will Republicans make for legislation aimed at voter suppression? Will Sandoval and Roberson really have an appetite for another "hot potatoe" issue that will likely drive more of a wedge between Republicans and minority voters? Will Ross Miller's proposed "electronic poll book" really satisfy the likes of Pat Hickey? Or will Sandoval and Roberson see Miller's proposal as a way to simultaneously save face while still seeming to demand some sort of voter ID?
Oh, and what will Democratic legislators think of all this Republican angst? And will this encourage or discourage them from playing ball with Ross Miller? All of a sudden, #NVLeg 2013 is becoming far more interesting.
Earlier today on KNPR's State of Nevada, incoming State Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis (D-North Las Vegas) spoke about a bill he and fellow Latin@ Democrats will be introducing next session to allow undocumented immigrants to obtain "driver privilege cards". This is certain to ignite conversation in Carson City next spring. However, what's really surprising about this is that Republican leaders have so far refrained from rejecting this. Governor Brian Sandoval (R) apparently even told Mo Denis he will "consider" this bill!
In fact, Republican leaders have already begun lurching towards this position. Last Thursday, Brian Sandoval made headlines by announcing the DMV will begin issuing drivers' licenses to those undocumented immigrants who qualify for "deferred action" (aka the "DREAMers" who would have been placed on a path to citizenship had the DREAM Act passed Congress). However, what was more shocking was State Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson's (R-Henderson) endorsement of this new directive. What was even more shocking is that other prominent GOP Senators joined Roberson in endorsing Sandoval's policy!
“These young men and women are living, working and attending school here in Nevada, and are doing everything in their power to improve their lives and the lives of their families,” Roberson said. “A driver’s license from the state of Nevada will aid in their ability to commute to and from work and school; will afford a sense of self-sufficiency; and will provide greater opportunities for thousands of Nevada families.”
Deferred Action, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is a directive from the secretary of the DHS that grants temporary permission to stay in the U.S. to certain undocumented young people. Individuals who receive deferred action may apply for and obtain employment authorization. It is estimated that more than 20,000 young immigrants could benefit from this program in Nevada.
Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, R-Reno, also applauded the policy: “This DMV policy allowing young immigrants living in our communities to obtain driver’s licenses will benefit not only the young people and families eligible for deferred action, but will also help strengthen Nevada’s education system and our economy at large.”
Sen. Joe Hardy, R-Boulder City, commented on the safety aspects of the policy: “In order to secure a driver’s license, an individual must obtain the proper knowledge and skill level to pass a test to ensure they can safely drive on the streets. This policy will not only provide greater opportunity for so many young people in Nevada, it will also make our streets safer by ensuring training for those who may otherwise be driving without a license or adequate preparation.”
We have yet to see if these Republicans also embrace Mo Denis' bill addressing those immigrants not covered by "deferred action". But so far, it seems like at least some Nevada Republicans are very publicly changing their tune on immigration reform. So why the sudden change of heart?
Basically, Nevada Republican leaders want to at least look like they're not so stringently anti-immigrant and anti-Latin@. And they're now changing their tune because they don't all want to experience the same fate that fell on Mitt Romney and Sharron Angle. Some Republican leaders are hoping that a "kinder, gentler" approach on immigration will fix their woes.
Are they correct? Not so fast. Matt Yglesias recently reminded us that the GOP's problems with Latin@ voters are not limited to one aspect of public policy.
Pundits are quickly turning to immigration to explain the Republicans’ Latino problem and to offer a possible cure, but the reality is that the rot cuts much deeper. The GOP doesn’t have a problem with Latino voters per se. Rather, it has a problem with a broad spectrum of voters who simply don’t feel that it’s speaking to their economic concerns. The GOP has an economic agenda tilted strongly to the benefit of elites, and it has preserved support for that agenda—even though it disserves the majority of GOP voters—with implicit racial politics.
Consider the GOP’s deeply racialized campaign against Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. What was so surprising about this—and I know I’m not the only fair-skinned English-dominant person with a Spanish surname who was genuinely shocked—was that conservatives could have easily opposed her purely on policy grounds. Sotamayor is a fairly conventional Democrat on constitutional issues, and that would have been ample reason for conservatives to criticize her. Indeed, Justice Elena Kagan was attacked on precisely those grounds. But rather than tempering opposition with at least some recognition that Sotomayor’s life story might be a great example for immigrant parents trying to raise children in difficult circumstances, the country was treated to a mass racial panic in which Anglo America was about to be stomped by the boot of Sotomayor’s ethnic prejudice. The graduate of Princeton and Yale Law, former prosecutor, and longtime federal judge was somehow not just too liberal for conservatives’ taste but a “lightweight” who’d been coasting her whole life on the enormous privilege of growing up poor in the South Bronx.
Polling suggests that the Latino problem for the GOP is deeper than immigration. John McCain got a scant 31 percent of the Latino vote despite a long record of pro-immigration policies. The best evidence available on Hispanic public opinion, a big election even poll from Latino Decisions and ImpreMedia, makes it clear that this is just a fairly liberal voting block. Just 12 percent of Latinos support a cuts-only approach to deficit reduction, and only 25 percent want to repeal Obamacare. Only 31 percent of Hispanics say they’d be more likely to vote for a Republican who supports the DREAM Act. This isn’t to say Latinos aren’t eager to see immigration reform, it’s just that the lion’s share have bigger reasons for rejecting the GOP.
So if Republicans really want to fix their problems with Latinos and other minority voters, then they need to engage in less "political window dressing" and more deep soul searching. However, this runs into what may be an even bigger problem Republicans now face. At this point, most of their base refuse to even consider the "political window dressing"!
Here’s what Iowa Rep. Steve King, who is already rumored to be a Senate candidate in 2014, tweeted out shortly after Boehner’s comments went public:
Obama voters chose dependency over Liberty. Now establishment R’s want citizenship for illegals. You can’t beat Santa Claus with amnesty.
-- Steve King (@SteveKingIA) November 9, 2012
And, while it’s easy to dismiss King’s voice as an isolated one, it’s worth remembering that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney adopted the position of “self deportation” for illegal immigrants during the presidential primary process for fear of being labeled insufficiently conservative by the GOP base. [...]
Six in 10 Republicans aligned with the tea party favor deporting illegal immigrants to their native country. A majority of “old school Republicans” —described in the survey as “more male, white educated and wealthy” in the Post-Kaiser findings —feel the same way. (For more on the various segments within the Republican party, check out this cool graphic.)
What that data suggest is that no matter what the party leadership believes should be done on immigration, there will almost certainly be opposition from within the tea party wing to almost anything that allows illegal immigrants to stay in the country. And, in case you haven’t been paying attention to Republican primaries over the last few years, that wing of the party has a huge amount of influence in picking nominees.
So before the likes of Dean Heller, Brian Sandoval, and Michael Roberson can convince Nevada Latin@ voters that Republicans have changed for the better, they first have to actually change the heart of their own party. And so far, the heart of the party is still aligned with the likes of Sharron Angle, Kris Kobach, and Joe Arpaio in opposing any and all kinds of realistic comprehensive immigration reform. And with the likes of Assembly Member Ira Hansen (R-Sparks) still pursuing the very xenophobic anti-Latin@ legislation that doomed the political careers of Angle and Romney, it looks like Nevada Republicans have far more work to do to "fix the Latino Problem".
As we've been discussing for some time, Nevada is (still) a Blue State. And Nevada turned Blue because of major demographic changes in the last 20 years. This is why Republicans here are at a crossroads.
Probably the biggest driver behind President Obama's fairly comfortable win here and Shelley Berkley nearly toppling Dean Heller in the US Senate race was El Voto Latino. Heller has certainly been thinking about this since Election Day. And this may be the key reason why he's not touching the new Republican immigration bill.
The authors of the [Achieve Act], Republican Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Jon Kyl, are retiring at the end of the year, and there’s not enough time left in the legislative calendar to get a comprehensive immigration discussion going before the start of the new congressional session in January.
Perhaps more important, unlike the Dream Act, their proposal doesn’t include a concrete pathway to citizenship for young immigrants brought to the country illegally, which leading Democrats have said is their bottom line on immigration reform from which they will not budge.
In recent weeks, even some Republicans — including Nevada Sen. Dean Heller — have adopted an outlook on immigration that includes a pathway to citizenship.
Heller told the Sun this month he supports citizenship for young, undocumented immigrants who enroll in college or enlist in the military — the two target populations of the Dream Act. He also said he was talking with Florida Sen. Marco Rubio — who has taken the lead on immigration reform — about the future of a comprehensive bill. [...]
Though Hutchison and Kyl credited Rubio with playing an important advisory role in the drafting of their bill, he was noticeably not listed as a co-sponsor to the legislation they unveiled Tuesday.
Neither was Heller. In fact, Heller hadn’t even seen the bill when the Sun asked him about it. Rubio also was silent.
So what exactly is the Achieve Act? Basically, it's Republican leaders' latest half-assed attempt to respond to the DREAM Act and offer some sort of realistic immigration reform.
The measure — sponsored by Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), and retiring Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Tex.) and Jon Kyl (Ariz.) —would offer a Republican alternative to the so-called Dream Act, providing a pathway for young adults to apply for legal permanent residency —but not citizenship —if they have completed military service or higher education and have worked in the United States for at least four years.
And even this still squarely falls into the EPIC FAIL category. Why? Well, why should young people be treated as criminals because they were brought across the border as children? Why should they be denied a chance at becoming American citizens as this country is the place they've come to know and love? So they can stay, but they can't be fully integrated into society?
And Republicans wonder why Latino voters have tuned them out? This is why! Do these Republicans really think they can treat DREAMers with such disrespect, champion policies of extreme racial profiling, obstruct any and all policies meant to promote economic empowerment in Latin@ communities, and then try to erase away all the blemishes they earned this year by proposing this? Apparently, someone smart explained this to Dean Heller in a way he could understand.
Already, immigrant rights advocates are turning down this "What Are They Trying to Achieve?" Act. This really should not be a surprise. Again, this has already been weighed and found wanting.
The DREAM Act is already conservative in nature and has even gathered support in the past from prominent conservative leaders, including Senator Hutchison herself, Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
The American people certainly appreciate the proactive efforts of the Republican leadership for beginning to engage in the conversation of immigration. However, voters, specially Latino voters, spoke clearly on election day that they support the original DREAM Act. Mitt Romney garnered only 27 percent of the Latino vote, primarily due to his threat to veto the DREAM Act.
Indeed, the ACHIEVE Act complicates an issue that the Republican senators have admitted is “a strong starting point” and “a humanitarian issue.” For example, for Dreamers interested in serving this country, a strange visa such as the "W-1" status does not currently let someone join the military voluntarily, so unless they also amend the law to allow such persons to enlist, the ACHIEVE Act won't help much.
Republicans lost Latinos big this election, but some have already committed themselves to fight against the DREAM Act no matter how popular it is. And using the ACHIEVE Act is a way to avoid a solution and politicize the issue. The fight for a common sense immigration reform will not be easy; and this fight is not only for undocumented youth, but also for the parents who took the brave step to give these young people a better life. Nevertheless, undocumented youth will not give up on the DREAM Act.
Not too long ago, the DREAM Act was considered a bipartisan first step for comprehensive immigration reform. But now, all of a sudden, we're supposed to believe that the DREAM Act is "too radical" for Republicans? And that all that can pass is some half-assed crap that relegates DREAMers to permanent second or third class status? No wonder why Republicans continue to struggle with Latin@ voters!
And no wonder why Dean Heller continues to distance himself from the bulk of his own party. And he may not be the only one doing so, especially on this issue. This may be what Harry Reid is counting on. After all, this may the only way of keeping the dream of political survival alive for certain Republican politicians.
This week, the Republican Governors' Association has been meeting in Las Vegas. Oddly enough, Nevada's own Governor has been schmoozing with the political major leaguers in Washington, DC MIA. Any guesses as to why Brian Sandoval isn't meeting with his fellow Republican Governors in his own state?
Most likely, he did not want to be caught in the middle of this.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) strongly condemned Mitt Romney Wednesday night for remarks the former Republican nominee made blaming President Obama’s re-election on “big gifts” for minorities and women.
“That is absolutely wrong,” Jindal told reporters in Las Vegas at the Republican Governors Association meeting. “Two points on that. One, we have got to stop dividing American voters. We need to go after 100 percent of the votes, not 53 percent — we need to go after every single vote. And second, we need to continue to show that our policies help every voter out there achieve the American dream, which is to be in the middle class, which is to be able to give their children the opportunity to get a great education, which is for their children to have even better-paying jobs than their parents.” [...]
“If we’re going to continue to be a competitive party and win elections on the national stage and continue to fight for our conservative principles, we need two messages to get out loudly and clearly: One, we are fighting for 100 percent of the votes, and secondly, our policies benefit every American who wants to pursue the American dream, period,” he said. “No exceptions.”
"The Obama campaign was following the old playbook of giving a lot of stuff to groups that they hoped they could get to vote for them and be motivated to go out to the polls, specifically the African American community, the Hispanic community and young people," [Mitt] Romney told hundreds of donors during a telephone town hall Wednesday. "In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups." [...]
"With regards to African American voters, 'Obamacare' was a huge plus — and was highly motivational to African American voters. You can imagine for somebody making $25—, or $30—, or $35,000 a year, being told you're now going to get free healthcare — particularly if you don't have it, getting free healthcare worth, what, $10,000 a family, in perpetuity, I mean this is huge. Likewise with Hispanic voters, free healthcare was a big plus."
Pivoting to immigration, Romney said the Obama campaign's efforts to paint him as "anti-immigrant" had been effective and that the administration's promise to offer what he called "amnesty" to the children of undocumented immigrants had helped turn out Latino voters in record numbers.
"With regards to Hispanic voters, the amnesty for the children of illegals — the so-called Dream Act kids — was a huge plus for that voting group," he said. "On the negative side, of course, they always characterized us as being anti-immigrant, being tough on illegal immigration, and so forth, so that was very effective with that group."
"The president's campaign," he said, "focused on giving targeted groups a big gift — so he made a big effort on small things. Those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars."
Once again, Mitt Romney and so many of his fellow Republicans refuse to acknowledge the new demographic reality of Nevada, and of the entire country. And way to piss off Latino voters, along with African-American and young voters, even after the election is over. Perhaps Mitt Romney is aiming for his picture to be entered into the dictionaries... Next to the definition of "sore loser".
And this is why Brian Sandoval is staying away from his fellow Republican Governors, even as they meet in Las Vegas. He would much rather hobnob with both Harry Reid and Dean Heller in DC. And most definitely, he would much rather receive prestigious awards (even if they are based on a myth) than sit around with grumpy Republicans complaining about what happened last week.
After all, Brian Sandoval is ambitious. And he may yet have a future. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is quickly on his way to becoming a relic of the past. And the Republican Party is still struggling to figure out whether to adapt for the future or keep wishing for an idealized version of the past.
Political pundits, campaign organizers and national magazines have declared 2012 the year of the Hispanic voter. Voter registration numbers and enthusiasm is up, and now all of those who invested in the wake-up call for this once-dormant demographic want to make sure it does not hit the snooze button on Election Day.
“I worked registering voters in 2008 and 2010, and I’ve seen a lot of enthusiasm this year,” [Izack] Tenorio [of Mi Familia Vota] said. “There are a lot of groups on the ground in Nevada encouraging Hispanics to get involved, and I’ve seen whole families come into our offices to all register together. I think people are starting to embrace their role and the choice they can participate in. Now, we just have to make sure they take that final step of getting to the polls.”
Mi Familia Vota came into this election cycle with the goal of registering 11,000 voters in Nevada. A few months in, the organization met that benchmark and set another one. That one was broken, too. More than 19,000 voters, the vast majority of them Hispanics, were registered, said Leo Murrieta, state director for Mi Familia Vota.
In a nationwide poll, Latino Decisions found that 8 percent of Hispanic voters had voted early as of Oct. 29 and 87 percent of Hispanic voters said they were “almost certain” to vote. Also, 45 percent of the demographic said they were more excited to vote this year than in 2008, when 84 percent of registered Hispanics voted. Notably, the percentage of Hispanics who said they were certain to vote and more enthusiastic than in 2008 have both increased in the weeks leading up to the election.
Many more Latino voters have been registered this year. But now, the real test comes. How many will vote?
Some already have. But as I hinted on Monday, we'll see a real "game change" moment today when more early voting sites open in Latin@ heavy East Las Vegas and North Las Vegas. For these final three days of early voting, the Clark County Election Department will be covering these neighborhoods much more thoroughly than we've seen for the previous 11 days.
So now, it truly is all about turnout. And since early voting is often the best (and sometimes the ONLY) way to get people to vote, these next 60 hours will be critical. And it may all come down to how crowded the Cardenas Market at Lamb & Bonanza becomes today (and tomorrow and Friday).
I know we've been constantly discussing the importance of Latino voters in deciding this election, but I just can't stress enough how critical they will be... And really, already are. Today, we're given another reminder courtesy of Latino Decisions.
Overall, Obama has the support of 73% of all Latino registered voters, compared to 21% who favor Romney. The 52-point gap matches the largest gap among Latinos this year, also found in the October 1 tracking poll.
For the ten weeks the impreMedia-Latino Decisions poll has been taken the most important issue for Latinos consistently has been the economy and the latest release revealed that Romney and the Republican party have been unable to convince Latino voters that they will be better at improving the it. Seventy-three percent of Latino voters trust Obama and the Democrats to make the right decisions to improve the economy compared to only 18% that trust Romney and the Republicans.
“The poll shows that this year we can anticipate record participation among Latino voters,” said Monica Lozano, CEO of impreMedia “It looks like the “Sleeping Giant” has woken up.”
Over the past weeks the number of Latinos who say they are certain to vote has gone from 81% to 84% and now 87%. At the same time, the percent who say they are more enthusiastic in 2012 has grown from 36% to 40% and now 45%. The percent who describe themselves as “very enthusiastic” has gone from 51% to 56% to 59% in the last three weeks.
And apparently, 8% of Latino voters nationwide have already voted early. Expect that number to rise this week, especially here in Nevada once more temporary early voting sites open in heavily Latino neighborhoods in East Las Vegas and North Las Vegas (starting Wednesday).
Look at how far Willard Romney has gone. He's been endorsed by the extreme right Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (R), the guy perhaps most responsible for Arizona's and Alabama's extreme anti-immigrant statutes as well as someone with well documented ties to white supremacist groups. [...]
Mittens not only opposes comprehensive immigration reform, but he also virulently opposes the DREAM Act, and he's been confronted by Latin@ students over it. And if that weren't bad enough, Romney's economic policies would also hurt Latino families if enacted by stripping away their health care, taking away opportunities to attend college, and destroying Social Security. Oh, and he also has long standing ties to Former California Governor Pete Wilson (R), the guy who ran on the extreme anti-immigrant Prop 187 and ultimately killed whatever chances California Republicans had of ever winning the Latino vote again.
And no matter how much Mitt Romney keeps trying to spin his own record away, the vast majority of Latino voters refuse to forget. This keeps coming back to bite Romney where it hurts the most.
Nevada truly is a dynamic state. One aspect of our state that continues to change fairly rapidly is our demographics. It provided an unexpected twist (to the East Coast based media pundits) to our US Senate race in 2010. And it may yet doom Nevada Republicans again in 2012.
We've talked extensively about the importance of Latino voters in this election. Today, we're given at least a couple more reminders of this.
First off, we have the new Latino Decisions poll and some very interesting numbers there.
After a slight decline in last week’s poll, Obama’s support is back up near his previous high 3 weeks ago. When asked who they would vote for if the election were held today, a combined 71% of respondents were certain or likely to vote for Obama, compared to 67% last week and 72% two weeks ago. A combined 20% were certain or likely to vote for Romney, compared to 23% last week and 20% two weeks ago.
One of the most interesting electoral stories over the last two weeks may be that while the overall national polls show Romney making noticeable gains on Obama, among the Latino electorate Romney gained only 3 points during his rise, but lost those 3 points back this week and stands at 20%. And a very important footnote to the national polls – if they are not accurately polling and counting Latino voters which will comprise 10% of all voters, they may be overstating Romney’s numbers by 2 or 3 points.
At the very least, this may explain the strange national poll numbers that occasionally pop up. If their likely voter screens are excluding too many Latin@ voters, just as most public polls of Nevada do, then the actual reality on the ground may be different from what's being said on the cable shows. And it explains why President Obama's campaign isn't breaking a sweat over the above mentioned national polls.
However, at least some from the national media are taking a closer look at what's happening here in Nevada. And perhaps they're starting to realize what's actually occurring on the ground.
“Before President Obama made his decision to go forward with deferred action, it was pretty dismal,” said Vicenta Montoya, an immigration attorney and Democratic activist. “I was going to vote for Obama but it wasn’t going to be with grand enthusiasm.”
Now Obama’s order has fired up Montoya and others in East Las Vegas, a swath of shopping centers, tire shops and weathered ranch houses sprawling east from the Strip. It’s the neighborhood of the often-unionized people who make Sin City function: housekeepers, card dealers and taxi drivers.
For some, Obama’s order pulled them into politics. Earlier this month, Hector Rivera’s father asked him what he was going to do with his future. Rivera, a high school senior who was brought into the United States without authorization when he was 5, went to the East Las Vegas Obama campaign office and volunteered.
The teenager already has applied for documents allowing him to work under Obama’s program. “It’s an opportunity for me and future generations,” said Rivera, 17, imagining how his own unborn children could benefit someday. “Even though they’ll be born here, I want to get a better job to give them a better opportunity so they can live a better life.”
Others, like Sergio Solis, have suffered economically but see the president as on their side. Solis had to close a restaurant in Southern California and move here to work as a salesman for an energy company. But, after approvingly mentioning the DREAM Act, Solis said it will take time to correct the country’s course following the eight years of the George W. Bush administration.
“This building here, I can dynamite it and destroy it in five minutes,” Solis said, gesturing to a supermarket where he was handing out brochures. “But I can’t build it back up in five minutes.”
This is a major reason why both Mitt Romney and Dean Heller are in serious trouble here. Like the rest of the G-O-TEA, they have embraced the anti-Latin@ xenophobia of their "base". And now, they are paying the price as Latin@ voters keep their distance from the Nevada G-O-TEA.
As I've been saying all along, this may be the ultimate factor in pushing Nevada (again) into the blue column this fall.
