Immigration Shows GOP Rule: The Party Always Moves Further to the Right

     Back in 2012 after the GOP defeat-one reason I never buy the pet  theory of both the Right as well as the Obama hating Firebag Left that it's all Obama's fault is the one time he has been on the ballot, the Dems had a good night-we heard a lot of the GOP leadership talk about how the party needed to do immigration reform.

     Yet, I for one was pretty skeptical that they would do anything of the kind and of course, skepticism proved right as eventually the Heritage Foundation would come up with a paper that claimed that the GOP need not worry about the terrible drop in Latino support because there were more than enough White people out there for the GOP to win. Karl Rove and the WSJ editorial page warned otherwise but they were ignored. 

     Of course, in the long view, it may be that nothing will prove worse for the GOP than their big win in November as it will just all the more convince the party who believes stubbornness is one of the cardinal virtues that they don't need to worry about Latinos-after all, it sure didn't hurt them in the midterms. Of course, much of the leadership knows better-like Rove for instance- but, when the GOP has a choice it never listens to the cautionary voices but those who are insisting that its right about everything and that if not today eventually the American people will follow them. 

    At least since the time of Goldwater, no matter what happens, the GOP comes out more conservative in the next term than the last. This is certainly true of immigration. I mean a trip down memory lane to the 1980 primary between the vaunted Reagan and Bush senior puts this in sharp relief. 

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixi9_cciy8w

    "Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman (R) focused instead on welcoming legal immigration, with Paul saying that we should not have a fence on the border because that’s not “what America is all about.” Huntsman suggested that the U.S. has to make sure it deals with the problem in a “human” manner like President Ronald Reagan did."

     "The invocation of Reagan’s legacy is an important point. In fact, if one looks back to one of the 1980 GOP presidential primary debates, it’s clear that the party’s debates over the issue have gone far to the right of where they used to be. In a debate at the Women’s Voter Forum that year, candidates George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan responded to a question about whether the U.S. should allow the children of undocumented immigrants to be in public schools by noting that immigration has to be dealt with in a comprehensive and humane way. Bush referred to these immigrants as “decent, family-loving people” and Reagan reminded debate viewers that immigrants who are working here are going to be paying taxes here too and dismissed the idea of a border fence:

BUSH: Look, I’d like to see something done about the illegal alien problem that would be so sensitive and so understanding about labor needs and human needs that that problem wouldn’t come up. But today, if those people are here, I would reluctantly say I think they would get whatever it is, you know, that society is giving to their neighbors. But the problem has to be solved. The problem has to be solved. Because, as we have made illegal some kinds of labor that I’d like to see legal, we’re doing two things, we’re creating a whole society of really honorable, decent, family-loving people that are in violation of the law and secondly we’re exacerbating relations with Mexico. [...] If they’re living here, I don’t want to see six and eight year old kids being made totally uneducated and made to feel like they’re living totally outside the law. These are good people, strong people.

REAGAN: Rather than talking about putting up a fence, why don’t we work out some recognition of our mutual problems?Make it possible for them to come here legally with a work permit.And then, while they’re working and earning here they can pay taxes here. And then when they want to go back, they can go back. Open the borders both ways.

      http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/09/314473/1980-reagan-bush-immigration/

      Actually what also strikes one is that Ron Paul sounds much better than his son on the issue as well. Bush Sr. sounds particularly good here, and this has been the case for the family as a whole down through the years. Part of it seems to be because of their long residence in Texas, where the attitude on immigration is much better than places like Arizona. What's interesting is that Reagan actually used the F-word-or A-word in this case, amnesty. 

      George W. Bush and his staff-Karen Hughes, and Karl Rove-had spoken of amnesty in his first term among themselves as the ideal. They didn't talk at all about the vaunted border security language that Bush would later have to adapt-as has President Obama-and even talked about what a gain their would be to the economy if all 11 million undocumented workers got amnesty. 

       Right now Boehner and McConnell are trying to figure out how to please the base on their response to Obama without burning down Washington-which is what the Tea Party wants. However, once again, it's the Bush house that is standing tall on the immigration issue:

      "Congressional Republicans are locked in an internal debate over a difficult dilemma: Is there any way of persuading conservatives they are fighting against Obama’s immigration tyranny with everything they’ve got, without fully using the destructive scorched earth tactics conservatives actually want them to employ against it?"

      "This internal tactical struggle — and with it, the broader debate over immigration — are now set to spill over into the GOP presidential primary. Jeb Bush has now come out against the tactics conservatives want — which are favored by Ted Cruz.

       "Robert Costa and Ed O’Keefe report that House Republicans are closing in on a two-tiered response to Obama’s action shielding millions from deportation. They may pass one bill rolling back the action, which would die in the Dem Senate. Meanwhile they may pass something that funds most of the government over the long term, while passing short term funding bills in immigration enforcement areas, setting the stage for defunding confrontations designed to force Obama to drop executive action. Conservatives want GOP leaders to push the targeted defunding strategy as far as possible. It remains unclear whether GOP leaders will do their bidding. If they prematurely cave, they’ll likely argue that they tried to stop Obama but just can’t. The right would not buy it."

      "But according to Costa and O’Keefe, Jeb Bush is telling Republicans to forget about the confrontational route conservatives want, and try legislating instead:

     At a private luncheon Monday on Capitol Hill, former Florida governor Jeb Bush told a group of GOP officials and donors, including soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, that the party should avoid a standoff.

     "Instead, Bush said in brief remarks, Republicans should pass a series of “sensible” immigration bills next year once they control both congressional chambers to underscore their commitment to governing and reforming the immigration system with their own policies."

     "The larger context here is important. Jeb Bush, you may recall, stirred up a searing debate among Republicans when he outrageously suggested that many undocumented immigrants, while undeniably lawbreakers, are in a morally complex situation (they are trying to provide for families and better their lives) and just might have something to contribute to American society. Given Bush’s suggestion that Republicans should legislate on this issue, a Bush presidential candidacy might force some sort of intra-GOP debate over what to do about the 11 million and whether Republicans can find a way to support some kind of legalization."

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/12/02/morning-plum-jeb-bush-again-challenges-republicans-on-immigration/

     That's why a Jeb Bush campaign in 2016 will be a nonstarter. So what you learn about the GOP's position on immigration in 35 years going back to Reagan and Bush Sr., is that the GOP gets more and more conservative on immigration but that the Bush family has always been light years ahead of the party on immigration-not necessarily some other things, though as much as I hated W, his attitude was preferable to the more typical Republican line of simply blowing up the Department of Education. 

     However, the GOP doesn't like Republicans that get out in front on issues-this could lead to rational parties, and the base won't like that.