Republicans supportive of broad changes to immigration law are trying to build a political fence between their party’s presidential candidates and the anti-amnesty position popular with many in the conservative grassroots.
Mitt Romney’s abysmal 27 percent performance with Hispanic voters in 2012, which many attribute to his hardline opposition to so-called immigration reform during the GOP primary, still lingers with Republican establishment insiders two and a half years later. They’re working to prevent a repeat of that performance, which they believe contributed to Romney’s loss to President Obama.
Republicans who advocate changes to immigration policy that would include a pathway to legalization for the estimated 11 million or 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States are working ahead of the 2016 general election to encourage GOP primary candidates to tamp down inflammatory rhetoric and support policies they deem constructive and politically sensible.
“The fundamental reason people should want to do immigration reform is that it’s hugely important for our economy,” said Jeremy Robbins, executive director of Partnership for a New American Economy. “But another reason to support immigration reform is the political imperative.”
The partnership is a bipartisan organization that formed in 2010 and has long pushed for Congress to pass immigration-friendly legislation. But since 2012 the group has taken a special interest in Republicans, who are divided on the issue. In a spate of recent events, the partnership has encouraged GOP 2016 candidates embrace a free market approach to immigration — and to create the political space for them to do so.
Last week, the Partnership for a New Economy sponsored a conference call with three prominent Republican financiers, including Spencer Zwick, Romney’s fundraising gatekeeper from the 2012 campaign. Zwick’s participation was notable considering Romney’s longstanding hardline opposition to providing a path to legalization for illegal immigrants or providing certain government benefits to illegal immigrant children.
In May of last year, the partnership hosted a conference call promoting immigration reform with Sal Russo, co-founder of the Tea Party Express. The group held another such call one month later featuring Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., a top presidential contender and a Tea Party favorite. All of these events and others the partnership is organizing aim to boost support for a comprehensive immigration overhaul among the disparate wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement.
Where the 2016 candidates stand on immigration and amnesty for illegal immigrants isn’t necessarily a deal breaker in the GOP primary. Many of the candidates who have signaled their intent to run are on record as supporting comprehensive reform and a path to legal residence in some fashion, although usually with the caveat that the border must be secured first. But the politically complicated nature of the issue can’t be understated.
Some of the most influential conservative advocacy groups, like Club for Growth, don’t take a public position on immigration reform. Most of the political organizations financed by billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch, like Americans for Prosperity, also are neutral on immigration issues. Republican officials outside of Washington are also less dug in.
During a news conference on Monday, a trio of Republican governors from the South expressed a desire to see Washington fix the nation’s immigration system once and for all. None voiced a desire to round up 12 million illegal immigrants and deport them. All urged the Republicans who run for president in 2016 to propose solutions to problems. But their focus was on border security and giving the states more power to help with enforcement.
“The country’s ready to have a discussion about what to do with the fact that we have 11 million folks in this country, and we’ve got to address what we’re going to do about that,” said Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam, chairman of the Republican Governors Association.
“We want our governors and every presidential candidate to be talking about this,” added South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, whose state hosts the third GOP nominating contest on the presidential primary calendar.
Republicans have been divided on immigration for nearly a decade, with centrists and business interests favoring broad fixes and grassroots conservatives and populists opposing even current levels of legal immigration.
But GOP lawmakers and party strategists of all stripes agree on this much: Obama has made the issue irreversibly toxic.
They contend that the president’s executive order, announced in November, to legalize and offer work permits to 4.1 million illegal immigrants killed any chance that existed for an overhaul to move forward this year in the Republican Congress. Even Republican members who back liberal immigration policies argue that Obama’s move was unconstitutional. The new order came on top of a previous directive legalizing illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. by their parents as children.
Significant segments of the GOP support these policies, if not the manner in which Obama has pursued them, and argue that demographics and electoral math demands that the party learn to accept them, if not give them a big bear hug. These Republicans say that while most ethnic minorities vote on the same issues as white voters, immigration reform is a “gateway” issue that determines if they will give the GOP a fair hearing on everything else.
Not everyone agrees.
White House hopeful Ted Cruz said in an interview Monday that American voters “do not support amnesty” and that they want the government to “get serious” about securing the border and solving the problem of illegal immigration. The first-term Texas senator rejects the premise that Republicans have to back a comprehensive overhaul scheme, saying instead that they should focus on “streamlining” the legal immigration system that honors America’s immigrant roots but doesn’t reward law breakers.
“I am both optimistic and pessimistic when it comes to immigration. I am optimistic in the long term and I am pessimistic in the short term,” Cruz said. “The reason I am optimistic in the long term is that I think outside of Washington, there is considerable bipartisan agreement on immigration.”
