November 29, 2005
An Immigration Win for the G.O.P.
You read that right, I'm the only one calling it and I'll be collecting I-told-you-sos next November.
The Conventional Wisdom states that immigration is a portentous train wreck for the GOP. Tommy Tancredo will split off the populists, Bill O'Reilly will stir up the pot, and the WSJ Ed Page crowd will splinter and the Grand Ol' Party is to be rend in twain. Until last night, I believed it. We cover the whole spectrum here at ThreeSources and it seems unlikely to pull us all together.
Sure, there is hand-wringing today after the president’s speech yesterday. Pat Buchanan was unhappy last night (there goes the Palm-Beach-County Vote!), Michelle Malkin is displeased this morning, Glenn Reynolds has a list of P-oh'd bloggers.
The limb
The immigration debate will close successfully because the two sides' desires are not mutually exclusive. You can't raise and lower taxes, can't pull the troops home and send more -- but you can strengthen border security and institute a guest worker program. In fact the two are complimentary and I cannot see either working without the other.
The President sends the House troops in to craft a Tancredo-esque enforcement bill. The Senate opens debate on McCain-Kennedy (Love the bill, hate the name), and (I am borrowing from Fred Barnes here) the final compromise is crafted in committee.
The President, to my dismay, has shown that he will sign anything, so an immigration bill with security and legality will be passed. The Wall Street Journal folk and I will wish it went further to provide labor, and the isolationists will wish there were more emphasis on mines for the Rio Grande. But both sides will shrug their shoulders, be glad they got a Republican bill, and move on to the next election.
Is it just me, or is all a reasonable compromise plan gets you these days is denigration from both sides?
Posted by: Silence Dogood at November 29, 2005 4:26 PMAgain, I think the compromise is possible here because the two desires are complimentary.
You'll not hear me talk so keenly about reasonable compromises on tax cuts or free trade. I think in this instance, legislators can craft a compromise, the Administration can declare victory, and government can move on to next thing it decides to ruin...
Posted by: jk at November 29, 2005 4:59 PMBut anything that approaches a policy success for the president (read that: anything that is popularly supported) will be - MUST be - torpedoed by congressional democrats. This "criminal" administration must not be allowed any semblance of accomplishment.
Posted by: johngalt at November 30, 2005 12:23 AMTrue. But this will be tough. The GOP does control the House (if we get the Hammer's focus back), the Senate (kinda sorta) and the Executive.
It will be very hard for all Democrats to oppose a popular legislative compromise. Most will of course reflexively oppose, but in an election year, you'll be able to peel off some for border enforcement.
Posted by: jk at November 30, 2005 9:48 AM | What do you think? [4]