WASHINGTON – Despite the appearance of bipartisan support for “comprehensive immigration reform,” where Republicans such as Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.; John McCain, R-Ariz.; and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., are leading the charge to provide a pathway to citizenship, it’s still a no-go for the more constitutionally minded elements of the country.
Former U.S. Rep. J.D. Hayworth, who represented Arizona as a Republican in Congress and was a colleague of McCain, now is with TeaParty.net, and told WND in an interview the current proposals are nothing more than a rerun of the 2007 plans, and “that means amnesty.”
Hayworth’s two main concerns when approaching this topic are, “Our sovereignty as a constitutional republic and where we stand fiscally.”
Although he said there are a variety of opinions within the tea party movement itself, he minced no words when discussing his skepticism about the latest bill, saying, “It”s the wrong policy at the wrong time.”
He said the plan – which is similar to an outline proposed by the president, focuses too much away from the central problem of immigration, which is the enforcement of the nation’s existing immigration laws.
“Regardless of the new people involved, that does not change the bad policies herein,” he said. “It is my opinion we should have an enforcement first policy and that has sadly been lacking in both parties.”
He continued, “Most Americans remain very skeptical about the government providing the manpower and money to enforce any of these provisions, but especially the security provisions… If current law is not being followed, what can assure us that any new laws can or will be enforced.”
He also is skeptical about the Democrats, because he believes the policies are being pushed for a “long-term partisan advantage,” as a majority of immigrants, studies show, vote Democrat.
The conflict between Hayworth and McCain on the issue arose earlier.
In 2010, Hayworth considered running against McCain for his Senate seat, saying at the time in a Wall Street Journal article he held “a profound disagreement with Sen. John McCain over the concept of amnesty, whether he wants to call it comprehensive immigration reform or a pathway for guest workers to remain.”
Hayworth also attacked the growing Republican perception that the GOP needs to embrace amnesty in order to win the Hispanic vote. He said that Republicans are following after the “myth of the monolith.”
He said not all Hispanics are for amnesty and believing “that just because somebody has a Hispanic last name that they somehow will embrace amnesty, I think does them [the Republican Party] a great disservice.”
Balkanization
Niger Innis, the national outreach director with TeaParty.net, said there are other problems with the amnesty program idea.
“It does not address assimilation, which is critical,” he said.
He notes that this is one of America’s crucial problems, because kids in cities are not being given a foundation in civics.
“The irony is that those who go through immigration the correct way must go through a civics and American history examination,” he said.
But under the new plan, it’s not a requirement.
He said that process is important to defeat the negative effects of “multiculturalism.”
If America doesn’t “absorb these people and make them into Americans,” the U.S. soon will resemble France, where there are pockets where minorities control and other natives would not be welcome.
With amnesty, he said, “You would see further Balkanization and a failure to assimilate new population in the millions.”
Hayworth also noted the impact on the economy, as the plan would “not create new taxpayers. It would result in the influx of more money takers … more people who would be dependent on entitlements. This would not bolster our economy.”
The fiscal issue is a concern, he said, citing the “multi-trillion dollar boondoggle that is Obamacare.”
He said the program builds newcomers into a national health care system, but, “What does that do to our fiscal future? This would create many more problems and threaten the survival of our Republic.”
He said the basic conflict is that the tea party movement is “all about restoring constitutional principles and adhering to the Rule of Law.”
“This proposal does neither,” he said.
