Yet another problem going unsolved due to fear, ignorance, a sprinkling of racism and plain old fashioned stubborness.
DRM
========================================================================
from (subscrip. required) -
http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB107118741915615800,00.html
A Republican Divide Widens Party's Internal Immigration Debate Is Reignited by Ridge's Comments
By EDUARDO PORTER Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
A deep fissure among Republicans over immigration policy is re-emerging two years after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks had silenced calls from the party's pro-immigrant wing for looser entry rules.
Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge reignited the debate earlier this week, ending a long Bush administration silence on the topic, by saying the government should try to give the millions of illegal immigrants currently in the country "some kind of legal status some way." Within hours, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo was on CNN blasting his fellow Republican, a moderate who used to be governor of Pennsylvania. "Ridge is way, way, way out of line here," said Mr. Tancredo, one of Congress's most outspoken proponents of tougher citizenship-law enforcement. "The secretary should enforce the law or resign."
Thursday, the White House played down Mr. Ridge's comments in Florida, a battleground state with a big Hispanic population. Spokesman Scott McClellan said the remarks hadn't been cleared with the administration, and that no decisions had been made. "This is a matter that is really under review at this point," he said.
The intensifying infighting could hamper President Bush's re-election campaign. Looser immigration rules are popular with business backers seeking new low-pay workers, as well as with libertarians. The change such as the kind Mr. Ridge suggested would appeal to the rapidly growing Hispanic population Mr. Bush hopes to attract in the November 2004 presidential vote. But social conservatives in the Republican base have long been opposed to easing immigration policies, and they now invoke homeland security as a new reason for cracking down.
It is a "battle for the soul of the Republican Party with respect to immigrants and Latinos," said Cecilia Munoz of the National Council for La Raza, a nonpartisan Hispanic advocacy organization.
While talk of loosening immigration restrictions stalled after Sept. 11, 2001, it re-emerged in full force over the summer, when prominent Republicans joined some top Democrats to sponsor a series of immigration-friendly bills. Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho and Rep. Chris Cannon of Utah in the House proposed to increase the supply of temporary Mexican farm workers and provide a path toward legalization for undocumented farmhands. Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch and Mr. Cannon sponsored a separate measure that would allow some high-school graduates now in the U.S. unlawfully to legalize their status.
Two Arizona Republicans -- Sen. John McCain and Rep. Jim Kolbe -- sponsored their own bill creating two new visa classes. One class would offer temporary work visas for low-skilled laborers, somewhat akin to the H1B visa available for high-end workers like computer programmers. The other class would offer a three-year work visa for undocumented immigrants who entered the country before Aug. 1, 2003, a form of amnesty for people who entered illegally. In addition, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn advanced a plan to allow employers to sponsor an unlimited number of foreign workers.
"We must recognize that as long as there are jobs available and employers in need of workers, people will continue to migrate," said Mr. McCain, when he introduced his bill. "Our nation was built by immigrants, and like those who came hundreds of years ago, this population represents a significant portion of our work force."
Yet even as the pro-immigration initiatives have piled up, another group of Republicans -- mainly from the party's conservative wing -- is pushing in the opposite direction, proposing tighter restrictions on immigration.
So far 112 members of the House, 105 of them Republicans, have co-sponsored the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal, or "Clear," Act, which would make state and local police departments responsible for pursuing illegal immigration. If passed, it would represent a sharp break from existing practices. Most local authorities steer away from immigration matters in order to maintain good community relations. Some governments, such as New York City's, specifically discourage such enforcement.
"My colleagues are telling me we are going to protect this homeland from people who slip across our border with 2,000 federal agents?" Georgia Republican Rep. Charlie Norwood, the chief sponsor of the measure, said when introducing the bill. "It cannot be done."
While agreeing that security needs to be bolstered, Mr. Cannon is critical of the Clear act. It is "an attempt to strengthen security, and almost everybody wants to do that," he said. "But a few people on that side want to remove all the illegal immigrants," Mr. Cannon said. Because most undocumented immigrants are Hispanic, he added, the bill could be considered by Latinos to be "an affront."
"Immigration is great red meat for the right," said Frank Sharry of the National Immigration Forum, a group supporting immigrants' rights. "There is a depth of feeling on immigration that isn't accurately gauged by [the Republican] leadership or the White House," Mr. Tancredo said in an interview before Mr. Ridge's comments on immigration. Mr. Tancredo submitted a bill last month that imposes a range of new limits, such as boosting money for border patrols and increasing penalties for violations.
The split on Capitol Hill is mirrored among the population. According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center, the percentage of Republicans who "completely agree" with the need to tighten immigration controls jumped to 54% last month from 38% in 1999, a mood swing prompted by Sept. 11. Among Democrats, the numbers rose as well, but less significantly: to 45% from 35%. While Republican Party leaders have become increasingly divided over the matter, Democratic Party officials have become more unified in support of immigration in recent years. In the past, Democrats were torn between an immigrant and minority-rights constituency on one side, and organized labor on the other, which feared competition for jobs. But unions have become more aggressive at organizing immigrant workers and thus more accepting of them