By JACKIE
CALMES
All but drowned out by Republicans’ clamorous opposition to President Obama’s
executive action on immigration are some leaders who worry that their party
could alienate the fastest-growing group of voters, for 2016 and beyond, if its
hottest heads become its face.
They cite the Republican
Party’s official analysis of what went wrong in 2012, the
presidential-election year in which nominee Mitt
Romney urged Latinos here illegally to “self-deport.”
“If Hispanics think that we do not want them
here,” the report said, “they will close their ears to our policies.”
“Both the president and the Republican
Party confront risks here,” said Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster.
While the danger for Mr. Obama is “being perceived as overstepping his
boundaries,” Mr. McInturff said, “the Republicans’ risk is opposing his action
without an appropriate tenor, and thereby alienating the Latino
community.”
But some Republicans say their party has the
greater challenge — as the White House is betting — in framing their opposition
in a way that does not antagonize Latinos and other minority groups like
Asian-Americans, much as Republicans lost African-Americans’ support in the
civil-rights era.
Most emboldened by Republican victories in
this month’s midterm elections were its hard-line conservatives, who say the
results vindicated their defiant actions, including last year’s government
shutdown. Their numbers in Congress will grow in January with newly elected
conservatives, significantly increasing the ranks of House Republicans who have
publicly said they would consider impeaching Mr. Obama.
As for immigration, many candidates took
stands against “amnesty” for those here illegally with little fear of political
penalty because few close contests were in places with significant Latino
populations.
Consequently, the party could hardly be
further from the positions on immigration that former President George W. Bush
and Senator John McCain sought in the past, and that Speaker John Boehner
unsuccessfully pressed on House Republicans at the start of this year.
“Clearly with Republicans not having gotten to
a consensus in terms of immigration, it makes it a lot more difficult to talk
about immigration as a unified voice,” said David Winston, a Republican pollster
who advises House leaders. “There are some people — because there’s not a
consensus — that somehow end up having a little bit louder voice than perhaps
they would normally have.”
Among them is Representative Steve King of
Iowa, once a fringe figure against immigration and now a voice of rising
prominence, to many leaders’ chagrin. Congressional leaders were privately
relieved that many Republicans had left Washington for the Thanksgiving holiday
before Mr. Obama announced plans for his address, reducing the availability of
anti-immigration conservatives for cable-television bookers seeking
reactions.
A King ally, Representative Michele
Bachmann, Republican of Minnesota, on Wednesday told The Washington Post
that the president, by his action, was trying to increase the number of
“illiterate” Democratic voters. Mrs. Bachmann, a 2012 presidential candidate, is
leaving Congress, but she has indicated that she intends to remain active in
politics.
And Representative Mo Brooks, Republican of
Alabama, outlined for reporters an escalating series of court and legislative
actions that Republicans could take, including impeachment. Mr. Brooks has been
outspoken against immigration legislation, including a House Republican’s failed
proposal to extend citizenship to so-called Dreamers — Latinos brought into the
United States illegally as children — if they joined the military.
“I don’t want American citizens having to
compete with illegal immigrants for jobs in our military,” he said, adding,
“These individuals have to be absolutely 100 percent loyal and trustworthy.”
A
few Republicans went public with their concerns that party colleagues would go
too far.
“If you overreact, it becomes about us, not
President Obama,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who
was a sponsor of the bipartisan immigration bill that was passed in the Senate
in 2013 but died in the House.
Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma, a House
Republican leader, noted that Republicans had held behind-the-scenes discussions
to temper reactions, and conceded, “I think our leadership and our members are
really trying to find, O.K., well, what is the appropriate response?”
The former Republican Party chairman Michael
Steele, appearing on MSNBC on Wednesday, admonished House Republicans to “get a
grip,” adding, “You have the solution already in front of you — the Senate in a
bipartisan effort passed an immigration bill.”
House Republican leaders have refused to
consider that Senate bill, and the only immigration legislation they allowed to
pass, sponsored by Mr. King, called for deporting Latino “Dreamers” who were
temporarily spared the threat of deportation by Mr. Obama’s more limited
executive order in 2012.
That bill died in the Democratic-controlled
Senate, but with Republicans taking charge of both chambers in January, party
leaders could find it harder to contain such legislation.
A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released
Wednesday found that a plurality of Americans, 48 percent, disapproved of Mr.
Obama’s decision to act unilaterally; 38 percent approved. But 57 percent
supported a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, and support jumped to
74 percent for a path that required would-be citizens to pay fines and any back
taxes and pass background checks — just as the Senate-passed bill would
mandate.
Exit polls this month also found that 57
percent of all voters supported a statutory path to citizenship, a position
supported by 74 percent of Latino voters. In the midterm elections, 62 percent
of Latinos voted for Democrats.
While most television networks declined to
cover the president’s remarks live, both Spanish-language networks — Telemundo
and Univision — quickly agreed to do so.
Matt A. Barreto, a founder of Latino
Decisions, a public opinion research firm that focuses on Latinos, said the risk
for Republicans was real.
“Their own 2012 post-mortem report highlights
that they cannot espouse anti-immigrant rhetoric and win the Latino vote, and
they are absolutely right,” he said, citing his firm’s election-eve poll that
found nearly two-thirds of Latino voters thought that the Republican Party
either did not care about them or was openly hostile to them.
“The issue here is that the president is
promoting a policy that tries to keep children and parents together, and stop
the detention and deportation of parents who have U.S. citizen children,” Mr.
Barreto said. “Can the Republicans honestly face Latino voters and say, ‘We want
the federal government to continue deporting parents who have young children?’
That is about the least family-values message I can think of and a sure way to
write off the Latino vote in 2016 and beyond.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.