The real hope for bipartisanship in the next Congress, at least in the afterglow of the election, is on the issue of immigration. It really wasn’t so long ago that large sections of the Republican Party, on up to their sitting President, favored the policy. Right-wing talk radio and the proto-Tea Party basically defeated it. But the high voter turnout among Latinos has those same forces modulating their tone. In fact, in a pre-emptive strike, Sean Hannity completely flipped on the issue.
We’ve gotta get rid of the immigration issue altogether. It’s simple for me to fix it. I think you control the border first, you create a pathway for those people that are here, you don’t say you gotta go home. And that is a position that I’ve evolved on. Because you know what—it just—it’s gotta be resolved. The majority of people here—if some people have criminal records you can send ‘em home—but if people are here, law-abiding, participating, four years, their kids are born here … first secure the border, pathway to citizenship … then it’s done. But you can’t let the problem continue. It’s gotta stop.
John Boehner, as noted before, also made nods in this direction in a post-election interview, saying that “a comprehensive approach is long overdue.” Establishment organs like the Bloomberg editorial board are calling comprehensive reform “inevitable.”
To be sure, immigration reform is desirable as an economic imperative. It would revitalize smaller communities, bring millions of workers into the real economy (the one that pays income and payroll taxes, among other things), increase demand and opportunity and entrepreneurship and basically all of those watchwords that America likes to tell themselves they believe in. That’s the reason to do immigration reform, because it will improve the lives of Americans on net, aside from it being the right thing to do at this stage.
But the idea that immigration reform will act like a salve to rehabilitate the Republican relationship to Hispanics is pretty far-fetched. Policy matters aside, Hispanics have turned against Republicans because Republicans have been cruel and racist toward them and their families:
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.
I don’t think Hispanics forgot this, and really it’s just one example. When you have national political figures on the right relating immigrants to cattle that have to be kept in a pen, that’s a serious problem that cannot be papered over with policy. This has pushed Latinos over into the Democratic camp, and after a number of years they have predictably adopted their ideological views on things like economics and social policy.
But the intolerance came first. That alienated Latinos and drove them away from the GOP. After being likened to livestock, it’s hard to keep an open mind.




10 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
“I don’t think Hispanics forgot this, and really it’s just one example. When you have national political figures on the right relating immigrants to cattle that have to be kept in a pen, that’s a serious problem that cannot be papered over with policy. This has pushed Latinos over into the Democratic camp, and after a number of years they have predictably adopted their ideological views on things like economics and social policy”
Where’s the evidence for this? Obama got 71 percent of the Hispanic vote this time, 67 percent against John McCain. Not that big of a difference. How do you even know that Hispanics themselves want these (liberalized) immigration policies? Not all of them do. To me what this sounds like is a lot of wishful thinking from some immigration groups, some Democrats, and some Republicans who’ve always wanted more immigration as well as “comprehensive immigration reform,” i.e, a mass amnesty for the illegal immigrants here now. Hispanics have been voting predominantly Democrat for a long time; I’m not aware of any big shift. Do you or anyone else have any hard evidence that such a shift has taken place?
And one other thing: the post says more immigration will bring more workers into the work force. Really? It’s immigration that’s keeping the unemployment rate stubbornly high now. How are yet more immigrants going to bring more workers into the work force? More immigrants will only drive the unemployment rate up even higher, and drive down wages for people who already don’t make enough.
If the R Party gets their bullshitters like Hannity to smooth the way as they’re doing, they will get corral some hispanics into their pen.
Hispanics have Telemundo and other Right Wing Hispanic Networks which brainwash with “conservatism” in the way that Fox News does.
Like Fox News, they use religion and “Conservative Values” (values for thee – not for me, the politicians demonstrate) to lure the easily lead into their camp (big tent).
Obama and the D Party haven’t done immigrants many favors, themselves.
Many more deportations than Dubya Bush.
And there’s been a crackdown on Visas for legal entrance to the US. (My inlaws are Philippino. The US wouldn’t let them come this year. I guarantee I’m sending them home. I always do. I promise!)
Yeah, the post is bullshit. Reagan signed amnesty into law in 1986. 2 years later Hispanics trashed the GOP in the 1988 election. Bush II did nothing about border enforcement, was pro amnesty, and deported far fewer than Obama. Hispanics trashed him in 2000 & 2004.
And enough with the bs about tolerance. Dems want more voters and more $$$ from the cheap labor lobby (headed by their WSJ mouthpiece). Any lofty rationales beyond that are just talking point bs for the neolib sheeple, who are always willing to further dick over the working poor just so they can feel more “tolerant”.
Just one thing. So far as I know Obama never said all Latinos should be send back or self deport themselves and then turn around and say ” vote for me”. Won’t work. So the Rs got to clean up their act . They can start in Arizona with Brewer and the good Sheriiff What’s his name. This issue is not going away until the Rs fix it. This and others like it guarantee the Rs are standing in shit.
the Latin vote may eventually split, maybe even 50/50, along conservative and progressive lines (assuming there ever is a party that represents progressive interests in this country). but it’s not ever going to split 50/50 for the conservative vs fascist/racist/protestant party lines, which is the duopology US voters have today.
the Latin vote comes from predominantly catholic (when religious) heritage. all catholics of all stripes understand what protestants say about them, in the privacy of their own churches. the same is true for a larger group of Latin voters, who understand that the One Drop rule applies to them too, for all that same game is played along slightly different lines in other american nations. finally, much of the Latin US vote can reach out and only have to reach across the space of a small living room to find a family member who is a true progressive, if not outright socialist, marxist, or other hard core lefty who make the people on this blog seem like the centrist conservatives they would be named, in the rest of the world. toss in the number of Latin US voters who can point to a family member who is a victim of the War on (Some) Drugs, and you’ve got to be kidding me if you think the teabagging neonazis who run the thug party today have any shot at better than 35%.
sure, there are latin conservatives. we hear all about them. we hardly ever hear about the latin US population that is energizing the new union movement, or leading the way in the battle for separation of church and state, or bringing experience and wisdom to the growing organic/slow food movement, or a host of other progressive issues. read some spanish language stuff that isn’t produced by the Fox News of spanish speaking US television, and you’ll see.
Our paper had quite a piece on George P…probably getting ready to run for State AG; he will be taken very seriously I imagine. Same piece still including Jeb for the future.
ohlordgod please No More Bushes
and yet, George P will be with us, and I guess Jebby is inevitable to run in 2016
heh, i wrote “duopology” instead of “duopoly.” talk about the Fr. Slip.
Now, now.
How can we rightfully (no pun intended) accuse Mitt of intolerance to Latinos? Why, he’s practically Senor Willardo, isn’t he!
His father was born in Mexico.
Not only that, but Mitt obviously went of his way to try to look Latino to Latinos when he went on Univision to be interviewed.
That didn’t scream, “I think you’re an easily duped people,” now, did it?
When you lose 3-1 to the Deporter-in-Chief, you tiene a problema.