Four Words to Watch in the Immigration Debate – Re-Blog The Foundry

Four Words to Watch in the Immigration Debate – The Foundry

June 7, 2013 at 7:16 am

The Senate Judiciary Committee works on the immigration bill. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom)
The Senate Judiciary Committee works on the immigration bill. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom)

The Senate will begin debate on the Gang of Eight’s immigration proposal next week. Here are four words to watch out for as the Senators make their case—and warnings about what they might mean.

1. COST “Cost” is one word that should come up in the immigration debate, because the Gang of Eight’s amnesty proposal has a cost that is simply too high for Americans to bear. Heritage analysis found that amnesty would cost taxpayers trillions of dollars. Amnesty means that illegal immigrants become legal—and become eligible for Obamacare benefits, Social Security, welfare, and Medicare. But they won’t pay enough into the system in taxes to cover the cost of all these benefits, meaning the rest of the taxpayers will have to bear the burden. This simply isn’t fair to hard-working Americans.

2. BORDER Despite claims of security—and talk of amending the bill—the Gang of Eight immigration bill doesn’t secure the border. Instead, it “delivers nothing new—other than the promise of spending a lot more money and running up our debt.” As James Carafano, Heritage’s E. W. Richardson Fellow, explains: “Amnesty immediately creates an incentive for illegal border crossings and overstays. Thus, the bill’s strategy would drive up the cost of securing the border.”

3. AMNESTY Heritage President Jim DeMint has said that it’s a false choice for people to say that amnesty is necessary to immigration reform. Amnesty encourages more illegal immigration, and that is not what immigration reform is supposed to do. Former Attorney General Ed Meese, Heritage’s Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow Emeritus, reminds us that America has tried this before, and it didn’t work:

Today they call it a “roadmap to citizenship.” Ronald Reagan called it “amnesty.” And he was right. The 1986 reform did not solve our immigration problem—in fact, the population of illegal immigrants has nearly quadrupled since that “comprehensive” bill.

4. “COMPREHENSIVE” Beware the word “comprehensive.” As Meese notes above, the amnesty of 1986 was also called a “comprehensive” approach to immigration reform. It doesn’t work, and it’s not what we need. We need a separate, step-by-step approach to immigration reform. An approach that works—that the American people can trust—would start with reforming the legal immigration system and enforcing the security measures that are supposed to be in place.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Quick Hit: Jose Aldana, an immigrant who came to the United States in 1997 and is still working to become a citizen, explains why he opposes the Gang of Eight amnesty bill.

Tim Scott: Meet the New Senator From South Carolina – WSJ Repost

Tim Scott: Meet the New Senator From South Carolina
By Steven Moore, online.wsj.com
December 22, 2012
Washington

Republicans in need of encouraging signs for the new year need look no further than Tim Scott. He was appointed by Gov. Nikki Haley on Monday to succeed Jim DeMint as U.S. senator from South Carolina. Mr. Scott is a charismatic and principled economic and social conservative from the Deep South. He owes his rapid political rise in part to the tea party movement. Oh, and he is black.

image
Zina Saunders

In a few weeks, when the new Congress convenes, Mr. Scott, 47, will take his place as the first black senator from a former Confederate state since Reconstruction. This will make it exceedingly difficult for liberals to maintain their stereotype of the South as a land teeming with white racists. “If that were true,” he says, “how could I have been elected to Congress in a district that is 70% white?” He adds: “I have campaigned all over the state of South Carolina. It is the friendliest state in the country. And truly here people judge you by the content of your character not the color of your skin.”

Though he would clearly prefer to discuss substantive matters other than race—”I try to steer away from these issues,” Mr. Scott says—he recognizes that he has been thrust into the spotlight as a groundbreaking black politician. With some prodding, he reluctantly addresses the subject.

He says that he is fully aware of the challenge that he presents to the GOP’s traditional liberal critics. “I think one of the most threatening places to be in politics is a black conservative,” Mr. Scott says, “because there are so many liberals who want to continue to reinforce a stereotype that doesn’t exist about America.” What stereotype is that? “That somehow, some way, if you’re a Republican you’re a racist and if you’re black, there’s no chance for you in society.

“We have serious challenges in this nation. Some are racial. But in my life, the vast majority of people that have really afforded me the opportunity to succeed were white folks. Is there a better way to say that?”

Mr. Scott’s own story exemplifies the change in attitudes taking hold in the New South. When he first ran for office 18 years ago, for county council, even his friends were shocked. “People said, ‘Son, you’re running in the wrong party.’ They had never even heard of a black Republican. I ran against a white guy, who was a very popular Democrat at the time. I won, not because I was black and a Republican. I won because they liked my values.”

Mr. Scott is sitting down with me in the Cannon House Office Building a few days after his appointment. Chairs and desks are stacked in the halls, ready to be moved to the Senate.

Most conservatives and Republicans in South Carolina and around the country were delighted by Ms. Haley’s choice. But the left wasted no time pouncing on the appointee. Adolph Reed, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, took to the op-ed page of the New York Times with an indignant piece entitled “The Puzzle of Black Republicans.” Mr. Reed sneered that Mr. Scott holds positions “utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans” and that his rise fits “a morality play that dramatizes how far [blacks] have come. It obscures the fact that modern black Republicans have been more tokens than signs of progress.”

To the left, Mr. Scott is dangerous because he has challenged liberal orthodoxy his whole career.

When he was Charleston County Council chairman in 1997, he decided to post the Ten Commandments outside the building—a move ruled unconstitutional in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU. Mr. Scott believes the free-enterprise system holds the most promise for allowing the poor to escape poverty. He blames liberals for an attitude instilled in minorities that they can’t succeed in America because of racial barriers, “which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.”

He thinks racial-preference programs and racial quotas are “mostly unnecessary,” because while he supports goals to promote minority hiring, “you can’t force people into relationships.” He adds: “It’s the same as when I asked the same girl out 10 times, and she just didn’t want to go.”

Growing up in North Charleston, he attended a mostly white but desegregated high school and was elected president of the senior class. After graduating from Charleston Southern University in 1988, he went into the insurance business and shortly thereafter hung out his own shingle as Tim Scott Allstate, which grew to 3,000 customers. He was elected to state offices beginning in 1995, then in 2010—the year of the tea party—he ran for Congress and defeated Strom Thurmond’s son. In the House, his first act was to sponsor a bill to overturn ObamaCare.

Despite his storybook rise—”I never even imagined being in the United States Senate, it was never part of the plan”—Mr. Scott has felt the personal sting of racism and has had doors shut on him. In high school and college he was bullied and “sometimes I got hate-filled notes with racial slurs attached to my locker.”

It was made worse, he recalls, because “I was a kind of an oddball. Had three pair of pants and two pair of shoes. And you know, you rotate them and you got made fun of. I had buck teeth, they were going in two different directions. It was a challenging time.” The barriers, he is convinced, “only made my will to succeed even stronger.”

The two guiding influences of his life have been his mother, who always worked two jobs (“I’m living her American dream,” he says proudly) and the man he calls “my mentor,” John Moniz, a white Christian and one of the first franchise owners of Chick-fil-A restaurants. “He took me under his wing and for three or four years he was telling me that as a poor kid in North Charleston, that I could think my way out of poverty. I didn’t have to play football. I didn’t have to become an entertainer.”

One of the people who got him interested in politics, surprisingly enough, was Jesse Jackson. Mr. Scott didn’t necessarily agree with Rev. Jackson’s politics but was struck that a black man could run for president—which back in the 1980s seemed a revolutionary concept.

Another influence was the late, legendary Sen. Strom Thurmond. “In 1992, I was the vice chairman of his last re-election,” Mr. Scott says. Really? He worked for the formerly staunch segregationist? “He was a complicated man,” Mr. Scott says, “but people change their minds. They embrace truth. In the end he received around 30% of the black vote. I’d like to get there. If Strom Thurmond could get 30% of the black vote, any Republican can.”

Mr. Scott has also been active in the tea party, and he bristles at the suggestion that its influence is waning. “No. I think almost every American is a part philosophically with the tea party.” How so? Because of what the tea party stands for, he says: “Limited government, free markets, entrepreneurship, capitalism, and making the government smaller, less intrusive and keeping it out of your pockets.” Those are enduring American principles, he says. As for charges that the tea party is racist, he laughs. “I was warmly embraced by the tea party. They openly seek more minorities.”

If conservative ideas work better, how does he explain the re-election of Barack Obama, the most liberal president in a century? “People like Barack Obama. He’s a warm person.” By contrast, Republicans have failed miserably to get their message across. “Most of our problems this year,” Mr. Scott says, come down to violating his first rule of politics: “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care,” reciting an old line from the late Jack Kemp, another Republican he admired.

Then he tells a story: “I put together a group of mostly black pastors and thinkers in the new part of my district, near Hilton Head. I told them, ‘I don’t expect you to vote for me in November. I don’t know that you will vote for me ever. But we’re going to start a relationship today. And it’s not about the election. It’s about life. It’s about changing the course of history for kids who are coming behind us.’ ” He notes that one of the pastors in the meeting called him after his appointment to the Senate to celebrate the news.

Mr. Scott seems to have a talent for reaching out to voters who might be expected to be skeptical of a Republican. The first step, he says, is simply to convey your interest. When he recently addressed a gathering of Mexican residents of Charleston, he did his best to read his speech in Spanish. “Think about the fact that I flunked Spanish in high school. I am not bilingual, I’m bi-ignorant. But they were chuckling. It broke the ice.”

He says he is frustrated that Republicans seem to be no better at communicating during the fiscal-cliff negotiations than they were during the campaign season. Somehow, the GOP has allowed the focus of the talks to center on taxes for the rich: “We need a spending conversation, but you cannot have that in the middle of a revenue argument, so we can’t win. The American people want less spending and less debt, but we aren’t talking about that.”

Once he has taken up his place in the Senate, he says, he will try to spur more conversation about spending, but he will also address tax reform. He will introduce the “Rising Tide Tax Reform Act,” which would lower corporate taxes to 23% and allow for permanent repatriation of foreign earnings back into the U.S. “On the personal tax code,” he says, “I like the plan of lowering the tax rate so that we can increase the revenue.”

A major influence on his thinking about tax matters is economist Arthur Laffer—”one of my closest advisers.” Raising tax rates, especially on capital gains, Mr. Scott says, will result in less revenue.

If he succeeds in his mission on tax reform, he predicts: “Once we get to lower tax rates, and we execute more revenue coming in, our economy will start growing at a faster pace, and we’re going to like the results.”

In the Senate the man he most wants to emulate is Marco Rubio of Florida because “he has the warmth and communication skills that I like.” Can he fill the shoes of Jim DeMint, who is leaving to become the president of the Heritage Foundation? “I doubt it because there is only one Jim DeMint, not two. But I have a desire to make sure that his consistent conservatism continues.”

Mr. Moore is a member of the Journal’s editorial board.

Making SC Proud: Nikki Haley to Appoint Tim Scott to US Senate

Peanut Gallery: Couldn’t be prouder of our Governor Nikki Haley and her choice of US Representative Tim Scott to replace retiring Senator Jim DeMint. South Carolina is doing its part to restore American values.
_____________________________________________

Nikki Haley & Tim Scott
Nikki Haley & Tim Scott

Nikki Haley to Appoint Tim Scott to US Senate – repost from townhall.com
Guy Benson – Political Editor, Townhall.com

With Sen. Jim DeMint on his way to take the reins at the Heritage Foundation, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley is charged with selecting his replacement for the next two years. According to multiple sources, her pick is Rep. Tim Scott, who will be the only African-American Republican in Congress when the new sessions gavels in:

Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina has chosen Representative Tim Scott to replace Jim DeMint in the United States Senate, according to three Republican officials. The move will make Mr. Scott the first black senator from the South since the late 19th century. The governor will make the announcement at noon at the State House in Columbia. She began informing the roster of finalists on Monday morning about her decision to go with Mr. Scott, who was the preferred candidate of many conservative leaders and groups in Washington. Speaking on condition of anonymity, three Republican officials familiar with the process confirmed to The New York Times the decision to select Mr. Scott. Aides to the governor declined to comment before the noon announcement. Ms. Haley seriously considered a number of potential contenders, particularly Jenny Sanford, the ex-wife of former Gov. Mark Sanford, who had been supportive of Ms. Haley in her race two years ago. But in choosing Mr. Scott, she selected a senator with a strong conservative voting record during his two years in Congress.

This is an excellent choice. Scott is a strong and charismatic conservative who will be a welcome addition to the upper chamber. The Left fetishizes racial politics, so it will be interesting to see how they react to Haley’s announcement. Continue reading “Making SC Proud: Nikki Haley to Appoint Tim Scott to US Senate”

Senate Energy Kabuki paid by Taxpayers

As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) put it, “Day after day after day, Democrats ask us all to come out here, not so we can make an actual difference in the lives of working Americans and families struggling to fill the gas tank, but so we can watch them stage votes for show.”

Senate Rejects Plan to Raise Taxes on Oil Companies.

Mike Brownfield

March 30, 2012 at 9:17 am

In case you missed it, there was quite a performance in the U.S. Senate yesterday. Liberals put on an election-year show, with the personal encouragement of President Barack Obama, in which they attempted to impose higher taxes on the oil industry as punishment for their profits while gas prices are at an all-time high.

The Senate rejected the bill 51-47. Despite certain defeat, liberals brought up the legislation in hopes of distracting the American people from the fact that President Obama is refusing to take steps that would help increase the supply of oil in the United States, and decrease regulation, thereby bringing down costs for consumers. As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) put it, “Day after day after day, Democrats ask us all to come out here, not so we can make an actual difference in the lives of working Americans and families struggling to fill the gas tank, but so we can watch them stage votes for show.”

Heritage expert David Kreutzer points out, most of what the President and his allies call “subsidies” are merely manufacturing tax credits that already put the oil and gas industry at a disadvantage: Continue reading “Senate Energy Kabuki paid by Taxpayers”