Posted on 04/23/2015 7:34:33 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
The latest Census Bureau projections show immigrants will account for 14.8 percent of the U.S. population early in the next decade, setting an all-time record and raising questions about whether the country has the ability to assimilate newcomers at such a torrid pace.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker seemed to step into that debate earlier this week when he broke with GOP orthodoxy and suggested potential limits on future legal immigration, insisting American workers’ wages should be a factor in setting U.S. policy.
Combined with his earlier reversal from pro-legalization to anti-amnesty for illegal immigrants, Mr. Walker’s remarks drew a rebuke from immigrant rights advocates and even some fellow Republicans who said he risks adding to the feeling among Hispanic voters and others that the GOP is anti-immigrant.
But Steven A. Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, who has crunched the Census Bureau’s latest numbers, said the size and scope of legal immigration is a critical public policy issue with consequences for education, health care and infrastructure — all of which should be part of the broader debate.................................."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I do think this is felony stupid to look at legal immigration when the illegals are pouring over the border as we speak.
“Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker seemed to step into that debate earlier this week when he broke with GOP orthodoxy and suggested potential limits on future legal immigration, insisting American workers’ wages should be a factor in setting U.S. policy. “
Absolutely right.
But the fact that he’s flipped 3 times on amnesty and is just now coming out on limiting legal immigration makes me think it is just a political ploy.
“I do think this is felony stupid to look at legal immigration when the illegals are pouring over the border as we speak.”
And there are limits on legal immigration already. If there weren’t, we wouldn’t have any illegals.
The GOPe is afraid to touch this subject (amnesty and what to do with all the illegals), so they are attacking legal immigration. As if that’s the problem!
Read Drudge’s headliner from yesterday. 51 million legal immigrants in the last 8 years. Six of those years we have had unemployed and underemployed Americans struggling to make ends meet, many of them succumbing to the government entitlement teat. Yet we allow a massive influx of immigrants (legal) whose only potential value to Democrats is their votes. Don’t tell me about felony stupid.
If you couple this legal immigration nonsense of vast proportions with the illegals here and coming daily, we have a certified demographic disaster of astronomic proportions. We will not survive if we don’t drastically curtail BOTH. We simply do not need them.
Heck go for 5 or 6?
: )
"political ploy"
I guess that's why, in 2011, Walker revoked instate tuition for illegals 6 months after taking office - Wisconsin is the only state that has done this.
that is a really stupid talk.
The question is what type of limits should be imposed on illegal immigration.
And the answer is what, Scott?????????
Most of those will be legal immigrants who arrive under the color of law rather than the illegal immigrants who draw the most attention in the immigration debate. But some members of Congress have increasingly been arguing the debate needs to be broadened to include the overall immigration picture and particularly its effect on U.S. wages."
There ARE. Have been for generations. Not enforced to the benefit of the Dems (voters) and Repubs(Cheap labor). Surprised anyone?
“I made it clear that for me, if somebody wants to be a citizen, they need to go back to their country of origin, get in line, no preferential treatment,” Walker said. “In terms of what to do beyond that, again, that’s something we got to work with Congress on.”
Walker has caused quite the gnashing of teeth across the political spectrum, and with all the right people from our perspective.
Legal immigration SHOULD be reduced.
Why does the term “legal” even need to be mentioned!?
There should be limits on legal immigration, and illegal immigration should be exactly zero. The level of those limits should be set by our elected representatives.
Illegals - those who are not “born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” - should not be able to pass birthright citizenship on to their children because they are not subject to the jurisdiction of our government (watch their home countries claim jurisdiction or authority over them when illegals are tried in a death penalty case) and therefore not covered by a literal interpretation of the 14th Amendment.
Legal immigration is a problem..because we are admitting more people based on family ties than on qualifications. The result is that we are letting in a lot of people who can’t work..are illiterate and a general drag on the country. At the same time..people with qualifications and education are excluded. We need to stop illegal immigration, but we also need to go back to quote systems by country. We also need to end birthright citizenship(anchor babies)..and end bene’s to illegals.
To me..this is the number one issue in the election. I simply will not vote for any politician from dog catcher to President who isn’t a true close the border, enforce our laws, make these changes candidate.
>>There ARE. Have been for generations. Not enforced to the benefit of the Dems (voters) and Repubs(Cheap labor). Surprised anyone?<<
Which is exactly why the debate needs to be refocused to legal immigration. Bad laws tend to be ignored, or if enforced cause more problems than they solve.
Walker’s attempt to switch the conversation to legal immigration carries the implicit assumption that illegal immigration has to be ended. Plus, arguing that American wage levels need to be considered in the bargain will appeal to many voters across the political spectrum.
Look at it this way. With one pronouncement, an unannounced candidate for President has got both Left and Right up in arms while the average citizen is wondering what’s wrong with trying to protect American wage levels? I think he’s found the spot that needs itching because a whole lot of people are suddenly starting to scratch at it.
And by emphasizing American wage levels, he really puts Democrats on the spot because they are the ones who favor open borders to gin up their voter base, while continuously claiming to be the representatives of the common man.
bttt!
We are also admitting way too many so-called refugees. Think of the tens of thousands of Somalis that Bush rolled out the red carpet for. And then there's families like the Boston bombers Tsarnaevs, who were granted refugee status because they were Chechens, despite the fact that no one in the family had ever lived in Chechnya.
Most of these refugees are fleeing nothing more than poverty, and that's not our problem.
Full disclosure, I am a natural born American citizen married to a foreigner. Obviously, I would support the right of American citizens to bring over foreign spouses and their children. But that's where I draw the line. In-laws, cousins and everyone else need to find a way to get here legally on their own. And if this process becomes increasingly difficult, too bad.
“Why don’t you just jump the shark and say he’s “flipped” 4 times?
Heck go for 5 or 6?”
Because I am not lying.
He has flipped 3 times now.
Even more than Romney or Kerry. So who knows what his real stance is?
Why do you think he revoked (only gov that has) instate tuition for illegals?
I am starting to like S. Walker more and more. Two persons I would never vote for: Jeb Bush and John McCain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.