Bloomberg
By David Weigel
April 21, 2015
Alabama
Senator Jeff Sessions was enjoying his unexpected new role: Policy
adviser to a Republican presidential front-runner. Scott Walker, alone
among the 2016 contenders,
had talked to Sessions about immigration policy. Sessions happened to
be the Senate's foremost advocate for reducing legal immigration to the
United States so long as the people already in the country needed jobs.
"The
next president and the next Congress need to make decisions about a
legal immigration system that's based on, first and foremost, on
protecting American workers and
American wages," Walker said on Monday's episode of the Glenn Beck
Program. "The more I've talked to folks—I've talked to Senator Sessions
and others out there, but it is a fundamentally lost issue by many in
elected positions today—is what is this doing for
American workers looking for jobs, what is this doing to wages, and we
need to have that be at the forefront of our discussion going forward."
On
Tuesday, as he headed into the GOP's weekly lunch, Sessions told
reporters that he fully agreed with Walker. Any Republican who wanted to
be the party's 2016 nominee
needed to be "fluid" on the issue–and Walker, unlike the three
Republican senators now running for president, had consulted with
Sessions.
“If Governor Walker commits to a discussion of this nationwide, I think it would be helpful for the republic.”
Jeff Sessions
"I
thought it was a good statement that he made," Sessions said. "He was
just saying, 'I'm going to ask the question, what is it going to do for
the wages and job prospects
of my constituents, the American people, as I analyze how to create a
proper immigration flow into America.'"
Walker's
statement puts him to the right of even Texas Senator Ted Cruz, who
told New Hampshire voters this weekend that there was "no stronger
advocate" for legal immigration
than him. "We need to improve and streamline legal immigration," said
Cruz." We need to continue to welcome and celebrate legal immigrants."
Just
as surprisingly–and just as impactfully–Walker's dalliance with
immigration limitation puts him at odds with the Koch networks, just a
day after David Koch told reporters
that he was inclined to back Walker. The Charles Koch Foundation has
aggressively campaigned for immigration reform along the lines of what
got through the Senate in 2013. The LIBRE Initiative, a Latino outreach
wing of the Koch network, has advocated some
of the same reforms, and rejected any talk of limiting legal
immigration.
"Congress
must act to provide the legal avenues necessary to absorb the current
undocumented population as well as accommodate future immigrants," said
LIBRE's executive
director Daniel Garza to Congress last month. "Immigration reform
should address the children brought here through no fault of their own
and allow for the undocumented population to ultimately become citizens
after paying back taxes and any other appropriate
penalties. But at a minimum, the U.S. should put in place a pragmatic,
viable market-based worker visa program that legalizes voluntary
employee-employer arrangements in a way that provides immigrant workers
fixed, legal certainty, and allows our private sector
to adequately respond to market forces."
The
contrast with Sessions's advice couldn't be starker. In January, the
Alabaman released an "immigration handbook for the new Republican
majority" which made the case
for limiting new legal arrivals. "What sense does it make to continue
legally importing millions of low-wage workers to fill jobs while
sustaining millions of current residents on welfare?" Sessions asked.
"We have an obligation to those we lawfully admit
not to admit such a large number that their own wages and job prospects
are diminished. A sound immigration policy must serve the needs of
those already living here."
Sessions's
argument was backed up by polling, and that's one of the reasons both
immigration defenders and critics are baffled by the Walker comments.
"I'm
extraordinarily glad I don't have to defend a) that level of policy
gymnastics or b) that specific dubious policy," said Liz Mair, an
adviser to Walker's 2012 recall
campaign who was quickly hired and terminated for his presidential bid,
in a series of tweets. "Internal polling must be looking dubious,
showing attrition to more grassroots-conservative-preferred candidates
for him to try this one."
In
an interview with Bloomberg, Americans for Legal Immigration President
William Gheen–who actually advocates lower legal immigration rates–said
that Walker was only
talking his language "because his polling data is saying that's what
Republican voters want." Gheen had not forgotten that in 2006, Walker
had made some favorable noises about a comprehensive reform bill. Mark
Krikorian, the executive director of the Center
for Immigration Studies, pointed out that Walker had said many of the
same things to Sean Hannity recently, and made no waves.
"He
name-dropped Sessions this time, and legal immigration cuts are what he
seems to be implying, but 'imply' and 'say' are very different things
coming from a politician,"
said Krikorian. "I don't mean to accuse him of bad faith, just that
he's been vague so far–maybe it's a trial balloon, to see what kind of
push-back, if any, he gets from the donor class, so he may get more
specific as the campaign progresses."
"Sure,
he sounds great," said Gheen. "He's trying to sound great now. But
earlier, he was saying something completely different. The Koch brothers
and the Chamber of Commerce
and the banks and the La Raza groups, everyone that's on board with
immigration reform -- they're looking for the best candidate that's
capable of deceiving people. It's the biggest price tag in America today
and it's the reason that America is going to hell
in a hand basket. No offense to you–I'm not talking about your work
specifically–but the media generally allows politicians to get away with
these lies."
The
media scrutiny of Walker's new comments has found him sticking to his
new position. In a statement to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Walker's
PAC spokeswoman AshLee
Strong addressed the controversy without walking back the idea that
sparked it. "He strongly supports legal immigration," she said, "and
like many Americans, believes that our economic situation should be
considered instead of arbitrary caps on the amount
of immigrants that can enter." That was concordant with what Sessions
wanted–and not with what the Kochs wanted.
Sessions
saw that as a bold move by Walker, a willing break with the donor
class. "There has been, within the broader sense of the word, an
establishment," he said. "Democrats
and Republicans. I think there's been a reluctance to have the issue
framed in this way. So if Governor Walker commits to a discussion of
this nationwide, I think it would be helpful for the republic."
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment