Report: Wisconsin’s Scott Walker Endorses Path to Citizenship

WSJ ^ | July 3, 2013 | Rebecca Ballhaus

[GIdget2004]

Scott Walker, the prominent Republican governor of Wisconsin, has endorsed a path to citizenship for immigrant workers, in comments that come amid uncertain prospects for the immigration overhaul on Capitol Hill.

A significant percentage of Wisconsin farmers depend on migrant workers, many of whom are currently undocumented

[Jean S]

Uht-Oh!

No kidding, this is disappointing. My husband and I will be attending his Indpendence Day celebration at the Governor's residence on Saturday. If any Wisconsin freepers would like to submit some comments to him about this I will be glad to give them to him.

[CitizenUSA]

Jim Noble: “Why do you accept the premise that there’s something wrong with being “opposed to legal immigration”?”

It depends on the form that legal immigration takes. I’m not opposed to legal immigration so long as American interests are put first. I’m not saying you’re wrong. This isn’t about right or wrong. Legal immigration policy is a matter of personal opinion. However, I think your opinion is not a politically popular or pragmatic one. In other words, I don’t see legal immigration being ended for 50 years, and I wouldn’t vote for that myself.

Again, that doesn’t mean I’m right or your wrong. I’m saying we’re fighting to save the country from a mass amnesty. It’s kind of unrealistic (to say the least) to think we’re going to achieve the exact opposite: deportation of every illegal and a halt to all immigration for 50 years.

[re_nortex]

An immigration policy should be first and foremost based on the national interests of this country. It is not a right to immigrate to this country--it is a privilege offered to a relatively few.

AMEN!

Here are the words from President Calvin Coolidge (justifiably admired by President Ronald Reagan) on immigration. This is from his December 1923 address to Congress:

American institutions rest solely on good citizenship. They were created by people who had a background of self-government. New arrivals should be limited to our capacity to absorb them into the ranks of good citizenship. America must be kept American.

For this purpose it is necessary to continue a policy of restricted immigration. It would be well to make such immigration of a selective nature with some inspection at the source, and based either on a prior census or upon the record of naturalization. Either method would insure the admission of those with the largest capacity and best intention of becoming citizens.

Those who do not want to be partakers of the American spirit ought not to settle in America.

Archie and Edith used to sing, "Mister we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again..." The present reality is that America needs a man like Calvin Coolidge...and we need him ASAP!

[so_real]

Full disclosure: I am an avid Walker supporter. Big fan. Huge. That being said ... Walker's statement from the Wausau Herald article was :

"Not only do they need to fix things for people already here, or find some way to do it, there's got to be a larger way to fix the system in the first place," he said. "Because if it wasn't so cumbersome, if there wasn't such a long wait, if it wasn't so difficult to get in, we wouldn't have the other problems that we have (with people living here illegally)," he said.

With all due respect from a Wisconsinite admirer, Mr. Walker, talk like that will have me supporting your primary opponent next election. The argument that we would not have people here illegally if our borders were a free for all is the dumbest argument on the matter I've heard to date. We are supposed to be a melting pot. Melting done right is not easy.

[CitizenUSA]

Let me tell you, it’s absolutely infuriating to hear what Mexican politicians have to say about America. They don’t believe in reciprocity. They see us as a place to dump their problems, and they collude with our own traitorous (yeah, I said it!) politicians against our own interests as natural born or legally immigrated citizens.

Nothing pisses me off more than to realize our political aristocracy (that’s what it is) is conspiring with a bunch of Mexican elites against us. If Mexicans stayed home, maybe they could start cleaning up their own (%^&#(%$ country!

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Coolidge also said something that accurately describes today’s GOP cowards:

“[The political mind] is a strange mixture of vanity and timidity, of an obsequious attitude at one time and a delusion of grandeur at another time.”

[afraidfortherepublic]

Do you know how our immigration system works?

I know enough about it to know that it is riddled with graft. We have quotas, supposedly. They make no sense if you really look at them.

We had Australian friends who got caught here in the 1970s when the husband lost his job. He decided to form his own business without going through his previous employer to get his visa "fixed".

They were caught in the most ridiculous rigamarole with immigration. Here he was, self sufficient and an employer of Americans, running a small business. Immigration put him on notice that he was going to be deported any minute. He had to put his kids in private school, put his house up for sale, and advertise for somebody else to run his business. He was not allowed to talk to any politicians about his troubles by order of Immigration.

After about 5 years of this nonsense, a friend wrote to GHW Bush who was VP at the time and told the story. As it happened the friend of ours with the immigration problem had worked directly for GWH Bush when GWH Bush was in the oil business. Green cards came in the return mail, much to our friend's surprise. The whole ordeal cost about $100k.

In the mean time, my friend's wife watched immigrants from S America just being waived through upon payment of a bribe, or two.

The system is broken.

[afraidfortherepublic]

Did I say that I was in favor of the Senate Bill. I did not, and I specifically stated so. Doesn’t anybody read?

[MplsSteve]

“Strange bedfellows.”

We had the same thing in Minnesota last year when the Legislature debated whether to have taxpayer funding for a new pro football stadium.

There was a strange but loud coalition of really liberal Dems and pretty staunch conservatives who teamed on the side opposing the stadium.

Each group had their own reasons - the libs wanted the money spent on social programs and the cons thought that the private sector should pay for it.

The bill passed because of another strange coalition - labor-backed Dems who thought the state should get jobs for the labor unions by building the new stadium and supposed pro-business Republicans who thought that our state had to have this stadium in order to attract and keep business.

It was definitely weird season at the Legislature.

[kabar]

I did not say there should be no limits. FGS, I wish people on this forum would stop putting words in my mouth (or keyboard). Limit comments to exactly what I have written. Don’t make up stuff between lines.

You did say that people should not wait 10 to 20 years to come here, implying that the only criterion that should be used is whether "they really want to be part of this nation." This sounds like no limits to me.

I don’t know when “sponsorship” began, or ended. I know it was the pratice during the 1940s and 1950s — even into the 1970s. Many refugees from Europe came here during that period, often sponsored by a church, or a family member. It didn’t have to be familial, either.

The Immigration Act of 1965 changed everything. It abolished the national origins criteria that confined most of our immigration to Europe. It opened it up to the entire world and set limits on how many immigrants can come from each country with certain exceptions and exemptions. People applying for an immigrant visa must show they can support themselves. They can't receive any federal benefit programs until after 5 years residency. Of course, the law has not been strictly enforced. We are importing poverty and immigrants use our welfare programs to a much higher degree than the native born.

Businesses could sponsor people. Business sponsorships were common in Houston during the 1970s to get people for the oil industry. And the companies often were very generous when the worker was fired, or wanted to leave, and would allow them time to convert their visas. I knew a lot of people who came here that way from the UK and Australia. Immigration put them through great tests to stay, while they waived folks from Honduras and other Latin coutries right through.

You are confusing temporary work visas with permanent immigrant visas. There are different rules for each. You can apply for a green card (Legal Permanent Resident) after six years on an H-1B visa if your employer sponsors you. Many of the people coming from the UK and Australia come here on work visas. We even have special categories of visas for them. The ones from Honduras and Latin America come here on permanent immigrant visas based on familial ties to immigrants already here. They are in effect sponsored by them.

When I was in college, my sorority sponsored a Hungarian Freedom Fighter and provided tuition and housing for her.

We have asylum and refugee categories that take care of such cases.

All of these people came here legally and relied for a time on the kindness of businesses and current citizens. What is wrong with that?

Nothing wrong with it, but you don't understand how the system works and why these people were allowed to stay and work here. The people who broke our laws and entered illegally are not the same kinds of people you cite in your examples. The lawbreakers committed multiple crimes including ID theft, working illegally, tax evasion, misuse of SSNs, etc. They are not the kinds of people we should reward with citizenship or be given legal status.

[afraidfortherepublic]

Show me a temporary worker who came here on a business visa who actually went home. It was common — very common — for all those workers to adjust their visas (with the help of their companies) and to stay on. The subdivision where I lived was full of people who did that until the bottom fell out of the oil industry in the 1980s.

[afraidfortherepublic]

The people who broke our laws and entered illegally are not the same kinds of people you cite in your examples.

Show me where I ever said that lawbreakers should be given a pass? You talk about identity theft -- you are committing idea theft, putting your delusions on paper and attributing them to me. Knock it off.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Did I say that I was in favor of the Senate Bill. I did not, and I specifically stated so. Doesn’t anybody read?

I did read your post but you did not read mine, and did not answer my question. I did not ask you if you approved of the senate bill as is.

My question was: So are you saying the the senate bill would be OK if they added/changed some border enforcement language?

Here is another of your comments from this thread:

I think we all endorse a path to citizenship, its just how we get there that is in contention. . But this article specifically says that Walker favors the Senate Bill. I don’t agree with him on that.

OK, you don't agree with the current version of the senate bill. I never asked you abut that. Do you agree that there should be a special, new, path-to-citizenship for those here illegally?

[FlingWingFlyer]

Sounds like someone has been “monitoring” Walker’s phone calls and email.

[kabar]

We had Australian friends who got caught here in the 1970s when the husband lost his job. He decided to form his own business without going through his previous employer to get his visa "fixed".

We have something here called the Rule of Law. Your Australian friends came here on apparently temporary work visas. There are conditions attached to such visas. If you change status and don't "fix" the visa, you are violating the conditions of your visa and committing a crime. It would be like someone coming here on a student visa and flunking out of school. He then decided to stay here and go to work for someone or form his own company.

After about 5 years of this nonsense, a friend wrote to GHW Bush who was VP at the time and told the story. As it happened the friend of ours with the immigration problem had worked directly for GWH Bush when GWH Bush was in the oil business. Green cards came in the return mail, much to our friend's surprise. The whole ordeal cost about $100k.

Some animals are more equal than others. This is the real corruption and fraud. Your friends should have been subject to the same laws and consequences as everyone else. Instead, it becomes a matter of who you know that can make you exempt from the laws. The laws are broken? What is broken is the corruption you cite to evade the enforcement of those laws.

In the mean time, my friend's wife watched immigrants from S America just being waived through upon payment of a bribe, or two. The system is broken.

Really, and exactly how were they privy to such bribes? Where did the money exchange hands? I don't believe the story especially from people who used influence as a bribe to stay here.

[kabar]

Show me a temporary worker who came here on a business visa who actually went home. It was common — very common — for all those workers to adjust their visas (with the help of their companies) and to stay on. The subdivision where I lived was full of people who did that until the bottom fell out of the oil industry in the 1980s.

It is done all the time. We have around 2 million here at any one time on various kinds of temporary work visas. Most of them go home once their visa expires. Yes, you can change status, but there is a procedure for doing it legally. The Rubio-Schumer amnesty doubles the size of the guest worker programs.

The Schumer-Rubio bill would allow unprecedented increases in the number of temporary workers. A new Center for Immigration Studies analysis of the bill finds that, in the first year, the bill (S.744) would admit nearly 1.6 million more temporary workers than currently allowed. After that initial spike, the bill would increase annual temporary worker admissions by more than 600,000 each year over the current level – an increase four times larger than the one called for in the 2007 Bush-Kennedy proposal (about 125,000).

As a result, this bill would roughly double the number of temporary workers admitted each year (nearly 700,000 in 2012). These workers are classified as "non-immigrants" and would be in addition to S.744's large proposed increase in annual permanent legal immigrants competing for jobs (more than 30 million in the next decade).

[kabar]

Show me where I ever said that lawbreakers should be given a pass?

This is what you said in your post #13. A path to citizenship in common parlance refers to the illegal aliens who are here. The Senate bill is the context. This is the reason why so many here jumped on you. What do you think we should do with the 11 million lawbreakers already here?

Walker endorses path to citizenship...I think we all endorse a path to citizenship, its just how we get there that is in contention. But this article specifically says that Walker favors the Senate Bill. I don’t agree with him on that.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

As a result, this bill would roughly double the number of temporary workers admitted each year (nearly 700,000 in 2012). These workers are classified as "non-immigrants" and would be in addition to S.744's large proposed increase in annual permanent legal immigrants competing for jobs (more than 30 million in the next decade).

Thanks for the chart.

I heard that S.744 also eliminates the category of siblings in the family based policy, but not sure what the big picture would be for family-bsaed.

[pokerone]

ConservativeMan55 you’re right about what thanks Republican candidates can expect from Hispanic voters: Nothing.

Recently in Massachusetts a first generation Hispanic, Gabriel Gomez, ran as a Republican candidate for the Senate, in a special election to fill John Kerry’s vacated seat. His much voiced support of Amnesty that the Gang of Eight was pushing failed to attract any Hispanic vote that I can see from the election results. As a matter of fact, all the heavily immigrant areas of Massachusetts voted overwhelmingly for the Democrat, Ed Markey, who simply repeated the Democrat talking points over and over. I don’t know why this race hasn’t had some analysis by a national pundit to illustrate the foolishness of pandering to illegals.

I knew he had no chance but that thought was reinforced when I drove to the polls and parked behind an SUV registered in New Jersey. Of course it could have been a rental or just borrowed but it made me wonder.

[ConservativeMan55]

Yep!!!!!!