Response to Dr. Weeks
by Mike Scruggs
Dr. Greg Weeks’ casual dismissal of two of my points regarding the insanity of a handful of NC Republican legislators proposing to allow illegal immigrants to be issued NC Drivers’ Permits (NC House bill H786) contradicts the substantial evidence cited. Apparently, he scanned my references a bit too quickly.
Here are the conclusions drawn again:
- Voting for amnesty and other liberal immigration policies does NOT increase Hispanic votes for Republicans.
- Voting for amnesty and other liberal immigration policies, however, significantly diminishes non-Hispanic conservative support for Republicans. [And probably Hispanic conservative support, too]
Here are the two main references given in more detail:
The first was a February 2013 Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) Backgrounder by Dr. George Hawley entitled “Pro-Immigration Congressional Republicans Do Not Perform Better Among Latino Voters.” Dr. Hawley teaches political science at the University of Houston. A more technical version of the study was published in the then current issue of the academic journal, Social Science Quarterly. I strongly encourage Dr. Weeks and anyone else to read it:
The second was a 2001 CIS Backgrounder by Karen Kaufmann and James G. Gimpel entitled “Impossible Dream or Distant Reality? Republican Efforts to Attract Latino Voters.” This is much less technical than the Hawley research but arrives at similar conclusions. It also dismisses by hard facts and statistics that anywhere near a majority of Latinos will be embracing Republican economic, fiscal, and tax positions in the foreseeable future. This study should clear the thinking of anyone willing to substitute factual statistical analysis for popular myth. Please, please, read it.
http://www.cis.org/RepublicanEffortAttractLatinoVoters
However, I well know that liberals prefer feel-good or emotional anecdotes and mythology to hard facts and quantitative analysis. If that be the case, please go to the CIS website and put “Latino Voting” in the website search. You will be astonished at the pages of research listings that confirm my statements. I have made it easy for you to start reading:
http://www.cis.org/search/node/latino%20voting?page=1
My article also covered enough statistics on George W. Bush’s exaggerated success with the Latino vote to sober many Republicans, but alas the myth of Bush’s 44 percent triumph perpetuated by Karl Rove endures despite the exit poll firm admitting a sizable error and agreeing with other polling consultants that Bush got no more than 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004. As I explained in the previous article, Bush’s relatively high Latino vote of 40 percent in 2004 reflected a good showing for Bush by Latino Evangelicals. This is somewhat encouraging, but one must realize that Bush’s overall and especially his Evangelical vote were up considerably from 2000 to 2004 among all groups. In elections, a rising tide generally lifts all boats.
I strongly believe the U.S. needs considerable immigration reform, but I also have a strong perception that what Dr. Weeks considers immigration reform is not immigration reform at all. I believe that immigration laws should be enforced and that there are reasonable economic and social limits to immigration. Harvard labor economist George Borjas believes a limit of 500,000 immigrants per year is reasonable. The 1996 Jordan Congressional Commission gave an annual limit of 550,000 as reasonable.
I believe we need an immigration policy that is good for America and American workers, taxpayers, and communities. But amnesty for 11.5 million illegal immigrants and new legal immigration and guest-worker programs that would bring another 22 to 38 million more immigrant workers to the United States in a single decade (sources: www.numbersusa.com and U.S Senator Jeff Sessions) cannot be good for American workers, taxpayers, or social cohesion. Only 4.0 million immigrants came through Ellis Island each decade from 1890 to 1950. Now, when 21 million Americans want full time jobs but cannot find them, the Schumer-Rubio sponsors tell us there is a labor shortage requiring 3 to 5 million more immigrant workers per year. The Schumer-Rubio Senate bill, S.744, is not reform; it is national destruction to accommodate the special interests of cheap labor employers. What’s going on here? Follow the money!
I believe Republicans should reach out to Hispanics and everybody else on the same economic, social, national security, and Constitutional principles that have made America great. Our immigration policies should benefit our businesses, our economy, and especially our people. Americans also have a right to preserve and protect our culture. Government has no business pandering to commercial and ethnic special interests at the expense of American workers, families, and taxpayers.
To repeat my original point, for even a small band of NC Republican legislators to sponsor a bill (H786) giving illegal immigrant workers NC Drivers’ Permits is so misguided as to be embarrassing for the great majority of conservative voters. It is laying out a Red Carpet for illegal immigration in North Carolina. The sponsors are likely to regret their involvement come the next primary season.
Mike Scruggs holds a BS degree from the University of Georgia and an MBA from Stanford University. A former USAF intelligence officer, navigator, and Air Commando; he is a decorated combat veteran of the Vietnam War, and holds the Distinguished Flying Cross, Purple Heart, and two Air Medals. He is a former Chairman of the Board of a classical Christian school—Westminster School, in Alabama. He has also served as President of the North Carolina State University Humanities Foundation and by Gubernatorial appointment on the Board of the Alabama Prepaid Affordable College Tuition Fund. He is the author of two books and more than 350 articles on a wide variety of subjects. He has served twice as a Republican County Chairman.
