Politico recently ran an article about conservative groups pushing for amnesty. This is how they put it:
"High-profile conservative groups are taking on an unexpected cause: passing immigration reform."
The article continues:
"A diverse mix of the Washington consultant class is cutting TV ads, revving up the grassroots and advising lawmakers on messaging and strategy in hopes of getting a bill across the finish line this year."
Sounds like this "diverse mix" of the "consultant class" can really move amnesty along. But, why should they have to work so hard if amnesty really is a conservative issue? Wouldn't it be an easy sell if it is an obvious conservative position?
The answer is that it is not conservative.
Conservatives tend to oppose amnesty. Conservative opposition creates the need for extraordinary measures to convince congressmen and senators that this opposition doesn't really exist. Even so, opposing amnesty is a position that cuts across political lines. Many from all political persuasions oppose amnesty.
Grover Norquist, a leader in the effort, adds this as his motive:
“We’re doing it to make sure…that Republican congressman and senators feel comfortable,” said American for Tax Reform’s Grover Norquist in an interview. “They look out and hear the guys on talk radio, and they go ‘Oh my goodness, everybody out there thinks this. That’s not necessarily where I was, but I guess if everybody thinks that way, I’ll either be quiet or go along, or I’ll listen to them so they can convince me.’ They’re now hearing the other side of the issue.”
Making congressmen and senators feel "comfortable" may be an admirable goal, but Norquist's comment betrays the true mood of much of the country - one doesn't have to make congressmen and senators "comfortable" if they are respecting the will of the citizens. In this case, that means refusing to go along with amnesty.
Furthermore, those talk radio "guys" opposing amnesty are giving a public voice to millions of Americans - a voice that the mainstream media generally ignores in favor of the point of view being promoted by Mr. Norquist. Our elected representatives are not hearing "the other side of the issue" from the "Washington consultant class." They are hearing the other side from talk radio, their constituents, and those organizations that oppose amnesty.
Norquist is sticking to this theme of telling us that a "handful" of talk show hosts are the block to amnesty while working hard to push conservatives in Congress into the amnesty camp. In another recent article we are told about Norquist's Friday meetings devoted solely to amnesty strategy and coordinating activities.
These meetings include powerful organizations devoted to amnesty along with "staffers from some of the offices of members of the Senate's Gang of Eight." The group coordinates "strategy" and "messaging."
Sounds like a very cozy bunch.
But, who is Grover Norquist that we should listen to him?
Mr. Norquist participated in a secret amnesty strategy session in 2009. He has recently participated in left-wing National Immigration Forum conferences as a featured speaker in October 2012 and again in February of this year.
In addition, the Washington Post has mentioned Mr. Norquist in connection with a campaign against the three main anti-amnesty groups. Frontpagemag.com labels the effort a "smear campaign." Other responses to the smear can be found at the Center for Immigration Studies, National Review Online, Townhall.com, and Immigration Utah.
Even more troubling are Mr. Norquist's connections to and work on behalf of Islamic radicals in promoting their influence in conservative circles. For more on this issue, see articles by Pamela Geller, Brian Fitzpatrick, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., discoverthenetworks.org, and Michelle Malkin.
If Grover Norquist and other Republican insider elites give Obama and the left an amnesty victory, what will be the ultimate outcome for conservatives?
In stark political terms, amnesty would create a large pool of new Democratic voters and make it increasingly difficult for a Republican to ever be elected president in the future.
The Democrats understand this and are anxious to get the GOP to go for amnesty - they know it will benefit them in increasing and maintaining liberal power in America.
Conservative columnist Ann Coulter understands the stakes. In a recent column titled, "Rubio's Amnesty: A Path to Oblivion for the GOP," she says:
"Strangely, some Republicans seem determined to create more Democratic voters, too. That will be the primary result of Sen. Marco Rubio’s amnesty plan."
Later in the essay, she lays out the political reality of amnesty:
"...With Hispanics on track to become the largest ethnic group in California this year, the state that gave us Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan is incapable of electing any Republican statewide anymore. Taxes keep going up, and there’s no one left to pay the bill.
That will be our entire country if Republicans fall for Rubio’s phony “Enforcement First!” plan. Perplexingly, some Republicans seem determined to turn the whole nation into California, in the foolish hope of winning one last election."
Given this reality, it is hard to understand why many Republican insiders are pushing so hard for amnesty.
Amnesty is not a conservative position and an amnesty would do serious damage to the conservative movement.