Some think the party
can toughen its image on illegal immigration without straying
from traditional positions.
By Peter Wallsten, Los
Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 11, 2007
- WASHINGTON -- Top Democratic elected
officials and strategists are engaged in an internal debate
over toughening the party's image on illegal immigration, with
some worried that Democrats' relatively welcoming stance makes
them vulnerable to GOP attacks in the 2008 election.
Advocates of such a change cite local and state election
results last week in Virginia and New York, where Democrats
used sharper language and get-tough proposals to stave off
Republican efforts to paint the party as weak on the issue.
In Virginia, for instance, where Democrats took control of the
state Senate, one high- profile victory came in the Washington
suburbs, where the winner distributed mailings in the
campaign's closing days proclaiming his opposition to in-state
college tuition for illegal immigrants.
The party's calibration could also be seen in New York, where
a number of Democrats won local elections in part by opposing
a plan by Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer to issue driver's
licenses to illegal immigrants, and in the presidential
campaign, in which party front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton has struggled to explain whether she supports the
Spitzer plan or not.
In Congress, a group of conservative Democrats, led by
freshman Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina, introduced
legislation last week calling for more Border Patrol agents,
heightened surveillance and additional requirements that
employers verify the legal status of workers.
The proposal does not include measures to create a path to
citizenship for millions of illegal workers, measures that
recently had been supported by Democrats nationally.
With polls showing broad discontent with the government's
handling of immigration, some Democrats argue that the party
can toughen its image without moving too far away from its
traditionally pro-immigration leanings -- for example, by
supporting heightened security at the Mexico border, opposing
benefits for illegal immigrants, and pushing for harsher
penalties against businesses that hire illegal workers.
"If Democrats turn a blind eye to the public concerns about
immigration, it would be a mistake," said Rep. Chet Edwards
(D-Texas), who won reelection last year in his conservative
district by taking a hard line against illegal immigration
while backing what he said were "practical" ideas for dealing
with the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. "If
Democrats are seen as strongly supporting the protection of
our borders and not supporting a vast array of welfare
benefits for people here illegally, and combine that with a
responsible approach toward earned citizenship for those who
have been in our country for a number of years, then it can be
a winning issue for Democrats."
The internal debate has grown emotional in recent days,
boiling over on Friday during a tense encounter on the House
floor between Rep. Joe Baca (D-Rialto), chairman of the
Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and Majority Leader Steny H.
Hoyer (D-Md.).
The caucus was upset because some House Democrats had backed a
Republican measure protecting employers that impose certain
English-only rules -- the latest in what Baca called a series
of frustrations with the party leadership's approach to
immigration.
"We're tired of people trying to scapegoat the immigrants or
Hispanics as a platform," Baca said. "Republicans have done
it, and Democrats have followed . . . because they're afraid
they're going to lose their elections. But we got elected to
represent all communities, not to vote based on whether we're
going to get reelected."
The party's dilemma comes in the wake of the Senate's defeat
this summer of a major immigration overhaul that would have
created a path to citizenship for illegal workers.
The issue has proved vexing for Republicans as well, with most
of the party's conservative base pushing for measures to
strengthen the border. President Bush, meanwhile, backed the
Senate bill, and his former political advisor Karl Rove has
long supported a moderate stance on immigration as part of a
strategy to lure Latino voters to the GOP.
Many Republicans believe the party's attempts last year to
paint Democrats as weak on illegal immigration -- including
television ads that some critics saw as playing on ethnic
stereotypes -- damaged the GOP's image among Latino voters and
helped put Democrats in control of Congress.
But Republicans have signaled their intention to make the
issue a central focus again. One GOP official said last week
that the party planned television ads targeting Clinton on the
driver's license issue. And former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt
Romney, one of the leading contenders for the GOP presidential
nomination, began airing an ad opposing driver's licenses and
benefits for illegal immigrants. The ad begins with Romney
saying: "We all know Hillary Clinton and the Democrats have it
wrong on illegal immigration."
Now, Democratic strategists, examining the party's need to
retain seats in conservative areas and win electoral college
votes in the heartland, say Democrats will lose ground if they
do not push back against Republican attacks on immigration.
Some say Democrats nearly lost a special congressional
election in Massachusetts last month because the candidate,
Niki Tsongas, did not adopt tough immigration rhetoric.
"It's very important for Democratic candidates not to allow
Republicans to define them on the immigration issue," said
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), chairman of the committee that
designs the Democrats' House election strategy.
"What we've learned is that candidates who address this issue
with a strong and clear manner were able to do just fine in
addressing the voters' concerns," he said. "But those who left
their field open allowed Republicans to falsely define their
position."
A recent memo by one senior Democratic pollster, Stanley
Greenberg, warned that voter discontent over immigration is
salient among many potential Democratic voters -- specifically
among less educated voters, African Americans, and blacks and
whites in rural areas who view illegal immigration as an
economic issue.
"Voters want control of the borders and workplace and
re-creating an immigration system that works and oppose
driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, positions supported
by about two-thirds of the country," the memo said. "For them,
that is the starting point, the common sense of the issue. If
political leaders do not start there, they are not likely to
be heard on other steps."
Greenberg's advice echoed arguments offered last year in a
strategy memo from a moderate Democratic group, Third Way. It
advised the party's candidates to be tough and fair -- but to
avoid sounding overly sympathetic to illegal immigrants at the
expense of average voters who believe they are paying for
benefits and bearing other burdens of a broken system.
"Compassion and justice for illegal immigrants ends when
taxpayer interests begin," the group said.
Several Democrats said last week that Clinton's difficulty
with the driver's license issue, which first arose at a
candidates debate Oct. 30, illustrated the very struggle many
in the party will face next year as they balance a complicated
policy issue against the emotional responses of voters.
Clinton lauded Spitzer but stopped short of fully backing his
plan.
Fellow Democrats accused her of trying to have it both ways,
while Republicans, such as party presidential front-runner and
former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, pounced on the
issue and declared their opposition to giving licenses to
illegal immigrants.
"As soon as I saw that come up at the debate, I thought, 'Oh,
this is a bad issue for Democrats,' " said California Assembly
Speaker Fabian Nuņez (D-Los Angeles).
Nuņez added that he thought Democrats should pick their shots
and probably avoid advocating driver's licenses for illegal
immigrants.
"I'd rather have a Democrat in the White House than get the
driver's licenses passed," he said.
Contact writer at:
peter.wallsten@latimes.com
- Los Angeles Times article at:
-
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-immig11nov11,0,7896251.story?coll=la-tot-topstories&track=ntothtml
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed by HispanicVista.com (www.hispanicvista.com)
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and educational purposes.) |