GOP Governor Candidates Stay The Course On Immigration Reform In California
Mar 28th, 2010 | 35 responses
California, being a border state, is in the forefront of a battlefield on immigration reform where political corpses are buried. Just ask Pete Wilson, a former Republican governor exiled to oblivion, who turned the state into a Democratic stronghold for his 1994 support of anti-illegal-immigrant blowback in Proposition 187.
After an immediate injunction, the meat and potatoes of Prop.187 was struck down as unconstitutional two years later that would have denied illegal immigrants social service, health care and education benefits.
Come 2010, the two major Republican candidates for governor have taken up the immigration reform issue as a major plank in their platforms. Their message is essentially the same as Wilson’s but tweaked to the times and a rising tide of public support casting aspersions on illegal immigrants sucking the public treasury trough dry at a time of high state unemployment and economic tailspin.
It comes at a time President Obama is reluctantly sending signals to fulfill a campaign pledge to Latinos he wants to tackle the issue. Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer of New York and Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina were close on an immigration reform package until it was politically detonated by an IED in the form of a Democratic victory for overhauling the health care system.
In California, the Republican hopefuls are Meg Whitman, former president and executive officer of EBay, and Steve Poizner, California’s insurance commissioner. Both stated their immigration positions in op-ed columns in today’s editions of the Los Angeles Times.
Whitman said she opposes amnesty, wants e-verification for employers to hire only legal immigrants and seeks state laws to prohibit charities and cities such as San Francisco for harboring illegal immigrants. She also wants Congress to pay states for incarcerating illegal immigrants. She opposes cutting off education funds for children of illegal immigrants for the “sins of their parents” and insists English be required as part of the curriculum.
Her op-ed message:
Taken together, these steps would make a significant difference in reducing the burdens of illegal immigration without casting unneeded and discourteous aspersions on Latino American citizens and driving them away from the Republican Party.
Poizner minces no words:
With the state budget in tatters, millions of residents out of work and a state prison system strained by massive overcrowding, California simply cannot continue to ignore the strain that illegal immigration puts on our budget and economy. Illegal aliens cost taxpayers in our state billions of dollars each year. As economist Philip J. Romero concluded in a 2007 study, “illegal immigrants impose a ‘tax’ on legal California residents in the tens of billions of dollars.”
Poizner stops short of advocating elimination of all taxpayer benefits to illegal immigrants as offered in Prop. 187 but wants severe cuts and policy changes that now “reward illegal aliens and act like magnets, drawing them to and keeping them in our cities and communities.”
He opposes amnesty, wants to revoke business licenses for employers who hire illegal immigrants and seek legislation banning those who offer sanctuary for the undocumented workers.
The Republican winner in the June primary will face former (1975-1983) Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown in November. Filing at the last minute, Brown has yet to update his position on immigration reform.
The Times, meanwhile, editorialized in favor of the politically unpopular comprehensive immigration reform but challenged its 100,000 supporters who recently marched on Washington to concentrate on grass-roots support for their cause to explain the positive effects will have on their lives, labor, economy and communities.
————–
EPILOGUE
As an observer of California politics for more than a half century, I suspect the platforms of the two Republicans on immigration reform will be a wash and won’t decide the outcome in the June Primary. But it remains a hot-button issue to California voters prone to scapegoating illegal Mexican immigrants contributing to the dismal economic conditions in the state. The Republican winner could use it as a major plank against Brown who is a proven dodger of bullets in the political theater. After opposing Proposition 13, which put the brakes on skyrocketing property taxes, Brown flip flopped and supported it just days before the election when polls indicated the 1976 measure would pass. Either way, immigration reform is a divisive issue in a state with a Latino population around 30%.
35 Responses to “GOP Governor Candidates Stay The Course On Immigration Reform In California”
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Deborah Lorenzo. Deborah Lorenzo said: GOP Governor Candidates Stay The Course On Immigration Reform In California – The Moderate Voice http://bit.ly/aidA3W [...]
I would just like to say that me and all Dead Kennedy's fans have missed you Jerry =).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW8UlY8eXCk
Immigration is at the forefront, and the line will have to be drawn (despite leftist “racist” lies and an extreme entitlement mentality about what immigrants have as “rights” in California) within the next ten years.
California is already threatening as early as sometime this year to be the state equivalent of Greece.
Pete Wilson was not done in by wanting to crack down on illegal aliens. Pete Wilson could not run for a third term due to term limits that were passed while he was governor. Proposition was passed with almost 60% of the vote. Proposition failed because the left leaning Democratic Party in California ran to court and had a constitutional amendment ruled unconstitutional.
The Republicans in California failed for many reasons but trying to limit the spending on illegal was not one of them.
LEGAL California citizens GET UP,organize NOW, – THEY CANNOT WIN AMNESTY. Maryland refused $500,000 request for CASA MD to help ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS find YOUR jobs w/YOUR TAX money! These programs exist in ALL states. While American Citizens busy watching TV, special interest groups & minorities (ALL South America China India Africa Russia + Special Interest ARE UNITING TO TAKE w/achor babies voting & 1,000,000's more to vote soon! LISTEN UP Pro-amnesty & activists.. get out YOUR Checkbook! American Citizens ARE NOT SIGNING ANY MORE! BOYCOTT all businesses (restaurants/hotels/associations that fund pro-amnesty organizations & activists (directly or indirectly)! YOU CAN STOP THEM BUT HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER LIKE CITIZENS DID IN MARYLAND!!
“Proposition 187 failed because the left leaning Democratic Party in California ran to court and had a constitutional amendment ruled unconstitutional.
That part is true. What the people want means nothing if it is politically incorrect. In this case, it was derided as “racist” (a lie) as well as attacked vigorously because it was the antithesis of the extreme form of the entitlement mentality (and associated sentiment, like demanding a risk-free or negative-outcome-free universe) that we've seen on the Left. (The entitlement mentality is stronger than the fringist activism related to “multiculturalism.”) It split the Republican Party then, and immigration can do it again now, too.
No one is scapegoating illegal Mexican aka illegal aliens, they are just speaking the truth about what is causing or state to resemble a third world in so many of our neighborhoods and towns. But that's not politically correct, so attack those that are telling the truth as bigots or what ever name they can come up with to discredit the message. This invasion is killing this state, yet the self righteous leftists would rather see the state totally destroyed than admit they are wrong. We are not Mexico's welfare system or the rest of the world for that matter.
These entitlements have to stop. We are facing a complete breakdown of our infrastructure and education system, yet the Mexicans keep coming and having more babies. If prop. 187 had been left alone and not overturned by a judge, we would not be in the mess we're in today. 187 could still be taken to the Supreme Court, but there's a lack of money to get it there.
We need a strong governor in this state that will tackle this invasion head on. Whitmans not it, neither is Brown. This problem has gotten so bad that it will take some really tough and strong moves to rescue this state.
California will be reaching a population of 44 to 50 million. There's room for them all, but it's going to be a much different place compared to today, as much so as today's California is different than when I grew up there. (And to the extent that many there all want to be in a few favored places, it will be a tight squeeze.)
http://www.ppic.org/main/publication.asp?i=900
bwc.berkeley.edu/home/presentations/…/homecoming_sunding.pdf
These people are saying that by 2050 the population could be sixty million.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=…
An Amnesty for illegal immigrants, will do several things that will cost a trillion dollars more for American taxpayers in processing and government benefits. Remember the main author of the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration law, Sen.Ted Kennedy stated , THERE WOULD NEVER BE ANOTHER AMNESTY.”
JUST ONE MONTH..?
LOS ANGELES COUNTY – Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich released figures from the Department of Public Social Services showing that illegal aliens’ children born in the United States collected over $50 million in welfare benefits (CALWORKS + Food Stamps) for the month of January.
Approximately 23% of all CALWORKS and food stamp issuances in Los Angeles County are made to parents who reside in the United States illegally and collect benefits for their native-born children.
“When you add this to $350 million for public safety and nearly $500 million for healthcare, the total cost for illegal immigrants to County taxpayers far exceeds $1 billion a year – not including the millions of dollars for education,” said Antonovich.
1. The illegal immigration rush to the border will never be stopped.
2. Millions more will be ready to run the US Border Patrol gauntlet, before the final act is signed.
3. It means literary-FAMILY UNIFICATION-, so those already here will be able to bring in their immediate family members. That means a rough calculation 3 extra people, (Just a minimum number) could mean another 100 million people, adding to at the least 20 to 30 million already settled here.
4. People will be waiting expectantly for a third AMNESTY.
5. Millions more pregnant females from all across the world, will try and sneak into America before the baby is born. This means that the whole family can move in, which is extra people to the welfare lines.
6. California will be sinking in financial quicksand under the behemoth volume of foreign nationals pouring into the floundering state. Therefore it will become a third world cesspool.The costs are in the BILLIONS of dollars.
7. The highways will become deathtraps–not that they are not already?
8. Our depreciating infrastructure will decline even more, as there will be even less money to pay for it.
9. Welfare rolls will soar to a unsustainable heights.
10. E-Verify, 287 G, Ice Raids, No Match Letter (Real ID Act & Save Act) would become obsolete.
11. Spanish will become the predominant language in border states.
12. Violence will erupt on a massive scale across the country, that could lead to unrest and riots.
13 Could even lead to a Second Civil War?
14. The only way to justify another AMNESTY is a nationwide referendum. LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE.
15. We must elect–ONLY–true conservatives? NOT RIGHT WING REPUBLICAN'S.
16. Sen. Dick Armey will vote for AMNESTY, so will Sen. John McCain, Sen. Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham.
17. We must remove Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), majority Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) from office.
18. Guest workers visas for farms and agricultural work are for that employment–ONLY? They cannot leave and on expiration of that visa, must return to country of residence.
19. ONLY workers with specialized skills, can get special visa's such as engineers, scientists and PH.d. But must be carefully vetted by federal agents. Not the Department of labor. There is much fraud in this area of employment, with less than reputable attorneys.
20. Our government allows around 1.5 million new immigrants into America annually.
21. Approximately 8 million illegal laborers are in the workforce today.
22. Go to http://www.numbersusa. com for a immigration qualifying records of our politicians. For instance Sen. Jeff Sessions has a high recommendation for fighting against the illegal alien occupation. We also need more tough police chief's like sheriff Joe Ariapo, to carry out their sworn duties.
23. Go to http://www.judicialwatch.org to view who has been involved in corruption in Washington.
24. NumbersUSA is fighting for every American worker and slow down the invasion.
25. Steve Poizner, a California candidate for governor, has declared he will cut all state entitlements to illegal aliens and begin the task of reporting these people to ICE. Jerry Brown never has much to say on the subject. and just meandering around the severe financial issue of illegal immigration in SANCTUARY CALIFORNIA. Meg has her good points stating NO AMNESTY. YES! to E-Verify and criminalize business owners who hire foreign workers.
NO COPYRIGHT. JUST PASS THE REAL TRUTH ON, NOT LIES OF THE OPEN BORDER ZEALOT'S
Just a curious question: How many people who oppose illegal immigration extremely strongly support larger legal immigration? In other words, if part of the solution was to crack down on controlling borders AND increasing the legal immigration numbers so that the free market determined jobs and residency, would you support it?
I ask because I suspect many people who claim they are only mad at the illegality component of the issue also do not want more immigrants even with papers. Especially if they are from THOSE places.
Please show me I am wrong.
If you want to base immigration based upon economnics, then great. Do you really think that there is no one is the U.S capable of parking cars and that we need to import them from Ethiopia where most people do not drive?
If you base it strictly on economics, then no more anchor babies, no more chain migration, and no more Korean dry cleaners.
I doubt that you support economic analyst but jsut want massive numbers of new immigrants because they are all automatic Democratic Islands.
I think a complete revamping of the system is in fact what we need. I think we need something equivalent to an unskilled worker version of the H-1B system combined with the money to enforce the laws regulating it and very hefty fines if you break the law. One reason for this is that it's not just migrant agricultural workers and food processing factories that are seeing hiring of illegals. There is also a massive amount of hiring of illegal immigrants in the construction trades and that does take jobs that Americans would be happy to have. I've seen it in roofing and heard of it in pretty much every other aspect of construction.
I for one, am sick and tired of these illegal aliens snubbing their nose at our immigration laws and the many other laws of this Country. If our Federal Government can not ENFORCE our immigration laws, and get these illegal aliens out of this Country, then let the States do it! One way or another, an end has to come to this illegal immigration, and not with AMNESTY! Amnesty will only encourage more illegal aliens to invade our Country and reward those who broke our laws and raped the American taxpayer in many ways…depressing our wages, taking our jobs, overwhelming our schools with their illegal alien children, driving without a license or car insurance, all the crime from stolen identities to rape, drugs and everything else.
It's time for ZERO TOLERENCE with these illegal aliens. It's time for them get out of this Country and back in their own Country where they belong. When we get rid of the illegal aliens, we will get rid of all the problems that go with them. THAT IS A FACT!
Quite an interesting increase in trolls here today and it sounds like they all want to protect us from those dastardly little brown people.
You know who they're talking about.. The ones that are trying to steal their productivity, their cars, their color TV set and their wife. [palm-to-forehead]
With the state budget in tatters, millions of residents out of work and a state prison system strained by massive overcrowding, California simply cannot continue to ignore the strain that illegal immigration puts on our budget and economy.
If the problems are our tattered budgeting process and our voracious prison system, why don't we fix those first?
Are there credible figures someplace that shows illegal immigrants are killing us? “Billions” out of the $85B California budget isn't actually that scary, especially considering the ways California's economy is helped by illegal immigrants.
And how much of that money is recoverable with tighter laws anyway? The war on drugs has been breathtakingly expensive, both explicitly on law enforcement budgets (see “runaway prison costs” above) and implicitly by bringing a plague on our inner cities–without denting drug supply. Why should we imagine a war on Mexicans would be any different?
Thanks Dr J for your calm response and reasonable questions. This is definitely an issue that brings out the emotions of people, something which always creates the danger of clouded logic and reason. The facts are what need to be considered, not kneejerk fear responses. I'm no expert on the subject, but I do know it's more complicated than those folks who think they have easy, quick answers seem to realize.
I support LEGAL immigration but I also support the ENGLISH language
Not to mention many Americans who are currently unemployed can not find work because they are not bilingual.
Where are we going to “fit” more people? The freeways are already overcrowded 24/7, there are lines in all stores no matter what time you go and they are building houses on top of each other…we have no more room to squeeze any more people here
I agree about the troll content.
So far, my suspicions are confirmed. Many people say it is the illegality that they hate, but many do not want immigrants here at all, no matter how many papers they have.
What does this mean, EuropeanQueen? (Interesting name….) What are your feelings about the Italian, Polish, Lithuanian, German, Swedish, Chinese, Japanese, and French immigrants we have had (and still have in smaller proportions)? None of them spoke English when they showed up here. I've spoken to a man from Niagara Falls who only knew Italian as a child until he went to school. French is only now, 200 years later, dying out of southern Louisiana…. Should none of them have been allowed here since they didn't speak English on moving? Or are you suggesting that we ban their languages upon arrival? And are we going to do this while maintaining we believe in small government and free markets? It's hard to have a small government and yet try to set rules about the very words that come out of people's mouths.
pacatrue: estimated by authorities in boroughs: NY has over 100,000 Irish on expired visas or otherwise here without legal docs. Serious. It would be interesting to know by nation, how many are here without papers.
Unfortunately, contrary to the views of the newly enlightened, it's nothing new… I wonder how many, like I, have “Paddy's” in their not so distant family tree.
paca -
I believe strongly in very liberalized legal immigration. We are, as has been said many times, a nation of immigrants. Immigrants bring a vitality, a work ethic, a desire to strive and achieve that often gets lost after a few generations. And it is very difficult to develop and pass on such ideals when you are here illegally, as you are starting your presence in the US as technically an outlaw.
Large-scale legal immigrants are more likely to form strong communities and social bonds, get involved (especially the second generations) in the local political process, and higher-level politics as well. Because they are here legally, they and their children develop a very different bond with the American dream.
Some illegal immigrants have some, but not all, of those traits. Additionally, with illegal immigration there is no control of undesirable immigration (mentally disturbed and criminal elements, as an example). Illegal immigrants are also a drain on legal immigrants as well as the public at large, and amnesty programs really make those who try to be law-abiding and play by the rules look foolish.
Our country has a well-defined history of economic expansions occurring after large waves of legal immigration, but large waves of illegal immigration have no such correlation.
the problem with unlimited immigration is that it hurts American citizens and they have little recourse. Look at how the nursing field will soon be totally dominated by Filipinos. That dominance will lower the average wage of nurses (by design), it will decrease the job prospects for American citizens (Filipinos do not like hiring non-Filipinos), it cuts off a career field for American citizens, and the poor English skills increase the number of medical errors. Does the left really hate blacks so much that they want to replace them with Mexican immigrants.
Why does the left hate the white middle class American citizens so much that the left wants to import millions from the third world so that the standard of living of those American citizens will do down?
SD, that argument needs some refinement.
1. We don't have have “unlimited immigration” at all. Illegal immigration is already illegal and already prosecuted, just like drugs. How much new legislation would reduce it is an open question.
2. Nurses make a lot, and we have a shortage of them. If a new influx drives down wages, that will not keep me up at night.
3. Filipinos are native English speakers.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by amberConvenienc: GOP Governor Candidates Stay The Course On Immigration Reform In California – The Moderate Voice http://bit.ly/aidA3W...
It is good to see people on both side agreeing that the US is in dire need of legal immigration, which we are. Illegal immigration does take a toll on society in general and we do need better controls.
The entire country is full of immigrants with expired visas…I know the state of California will employ them without question. These people need to be deported, regardless of where they came from, and put back into the pool of people wanting to legally come to America.
How many people should this state and the country have? That is the question that most who advocate for illegal aliens or increased legal immigration do not want to answer. Do we need a population in this state of 50 or more million? Do we need another 100 million people in this country in the next 40 years? Some 90+ percent of population increase in this state is caused by immigrants and their children. Legality is not an issue when it comes to numbers and resources. As it stands in California, because of current population increases we have the worst schools, some of the highest taxes and poorest services. Failing infrastructure, crowded jails, high energy costs, water shortages and loss of farm land can all be attributed to growth. Wage stagnation,loss of affordable housing and urban sprawl impact us all.
Population increases are the single largest threat to this state and country. Almost every facet of civilized life in this country is impacted by an increase in numbers. Politicians and business only look at their own immediate benefits made by growth. The long term negative consequences affect everyone.
For every person added to this country, 12 acres of undeveloped land is developed. That is regardless of legality or being native born. We as a nation must step up and answer this one question. What kind of country are we going to leave for our children and grandchildren? Will it be similar to today's or will it be like China or India?
We aren't even close to maxing out population per acre in this country. The problem isn't immigration, it is who we allow to migrate. It is the rules we setup that make highly qualified doctors and scientists jump through a thousand hoops to get a visa.
The second time I moved to Germany, I went on an IT visa…..it took me one week to get with very little paperwork. The US is nothing compared to Germany when it comes to red tape….they love it….and it still only took me 1 week. There are people we need and we need to be 1 week quick in order to get them.
“The problem isn't immigration, it is who we allow to migrate.”
One of a number of great liberal errors made (unsurprisingly, in the 1960s) was to change from an individual assessment and evaluation system to “family reunification.” It's touchy-feely, but dumb.
The most attractive places in this country were “maxed out” long ago (I grew up in California when it was much less crowded, crime-ridden, and expensive than it is now and always will be now).
Much growth is outward, in outer suburbs and exurbs. I believe many people after 2020-2030 will rediscover more-convenient older inner-ring suburbs if they can be cleaned up and revitalized (and also gentrified in many cases). I can foresee older people living there, along with young families (many of which will be minority-group and immigrant families).
There is still plenty of room for more growth, not only in metro areas but in nearby (especially nearby) small towns, not only in California but in the eastern USA (something many people in California know nothing about, because they never plan to leave California and never think about much that is outside that state). As I've said before, the eastern USA (especially so much of the Midwest, and the Southeast where so many Boomers not moving to the Southwest will go in the future, and in the Northeast outside the Corridor) still offers plenty of room for growth, and if the future featured much “spead out” or “even” growth, the whole East someday might support inter-regional high speed rail. (The Southwest will probably remain the most popular destination, but clustering and crowding are likely the result there.)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a…
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/imagere…
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw-v2/present…
For those who want to see more,
Here are links for gridded population maps of the USA and of the world (we're far from being as densely populated even as Europe, let alone southeast Asia and India!)
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/country.js…
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/global.jsp#
Less accurate but also of interest, of course, is nighttime light imagery.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0610/ear…
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/mapGallery/images…
Great Lakes
http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/atlas/images/big1…
Europe
http://www.savethenight.eu/Lights%20in%20Europe…
http://www.savethenight.eu/Light%20Pollution%20…
Related — Europe — relief plus night light population distribution or density
http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ERD/DB/mapdb/ma…
World, portions
http://geology.com/articles/satellite-photo-ear…
“Where are we going to “fit” more people?”
The answer is where you're doing it now, as I've seen on my last trip to LA metro — spilling out into the desert (from the LA Basin) and continuing to develop the Inland Empire, as well as the Central Valley. There are other parts of the state that are uncrowded, but are less desireable, and they will be spared, or neglected.
I've also noted elsewhere (drew a rude and stupid response, but that's the way it goes, I guess) that something California never did that it still could do and should do to fully develop its economy and society, is to fully develop the Monterey Bay area so that it competes with or surpasses the San Diego area in size (population, extent of development) and becomes another national-class (top ten) metro area.
It will be uneven development in any case and there will be crowding as there has been (as there was when I grew up there, just less of it) in the more desireable littoral areas, but that's to be expected. What you'll also see for now is continuing outward expansion of the developed areas, because people want suburban or exurban detached home sites and new, new, new structures, so long as they can afford it and want to pay for it, that's what you're going to continue to see. On my recent trip to LA I found the stretch from Barstow to Victorville amazing, but once past the initial surprise it was no surprise, really. Just wait until the Baby Boomers start retiring in large numbers in the 2020s-2030s and so many more people want to relocate to (largely southern) California (as well as the rest of the Southwest). California is also important because most immigrants want to go there — it's an order of magnitude or more greater a draw than Florida
ever has been or will be.
It remains to be seen if something I believe can happen everywhere in the USA will happen in California — it has areas that are old enough, so it's possible — the “discovery” of older inner-ring suburbs and their consequent revitalization (gentrification in numerous cases), as well as some instances (certainly likely in California, whose city locations are attractive) of repopulation of the central cities as well, as the population ages. Add to that something overdue that will likely happen eventually in existing suburbs, which is to add “granny unit” smaller second homes on so many home sites. All that remains to be done in the inner cities or the choicest inner-ring suburbs is to build some high-rise housing, which may be the future for many elderly rather than “big box” style institutions.
Here (below) is a California population density map. The answer to your question, of where the future population of 45-50 (or even 60) million will fit, is largely where the population is located now. Just a bit more spread out and more dense, too. You can see that there's still plenty of room, plenty of land for more people to be added to California's population, especially in the Central Valley (and in the Monterey Bay area, which the map reveals has been very neglected.)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a…
Most of the growth will be where the future interest is, which likely will be in Southern California. The 2000 census put the mean population center of California near Buttonwillow. I'm curious where the 2010 census will locate the population center or “centroid” for California.
(The Southland is well past the point of tragedy when the Big One strikes. It'll be the worst disaster in US history. It was already destined to be that when I moved south from the Bay Area and lived in the LA area from 1985-1992.)
If I were the greatest landowner ever, I not only would own the Presidio and much of Monterey Bay, I'd own Pendleton. Camp Pendleton is the last big chunk of coastal-and-inland real estate between LA and San Diego that hasn't been developed. The military and the federal government could make a financial killing someday, and help pay off the massive bloated government's costs.
http://www.pendleton.usmc.mil/cpao/pages/pcs/map.pdf