Here’s more from Eagle
Forum president Phyllis Schlafly on immigration, published at National Review
Online:
People come to America
because it is a remarkable oasis of freedom, prosperity, and opportunity.
Conservatives recognize that the principal reason for our unique abundance is
our constitutional restraint on the power of government. . . .
Maintaining this system
requires the public to support limited government. In a new report,
Eagle Forum details how immigration is fundamentally changing the electorate to
one that is much more supportive of big government.
. . .
There is nothing
controversial about the report’s conclusion that both Hispanics and Asians, who
account for about three-fourth of today’s immigrants, generally agree with the
Democrats’ big-government agenda. It is for this reason that they vote
two-to-one for Democrats.
The 2008 National Annenberg
Election Survey found that 62 percent of immigrants prefer a single,
government-run health-care system. . . .
The Pew Research Center has
also found that 75 percent of Hispanics prefer a “bigger government providing
more services,” and only 19 percent prefer a smaller government. Pew also
reported that 55 percent of Asians prefer “bigger government providing more
services,” and only 36 percent prefer a smaller government. So it’s no surprise
that in 2012, 71 percent of Hispanics and 73 percent of Asians voted for Obama.
. . .
Heather Mac Donald of the
Manhattan Institute points out that it “is not immigration policy
that creates the strong bond between Hispanics and the Democratic party, but
the core Democratic principles of a more generous safety net, strong government
intervention in the economy, and progressive taxation.”
Immigration in general —
not race — is the issue. . . .The problem for conservatives is not race or
ethnicity but immigration as such.
. . .
Those supporting a big
increase in legal immigration point to the successful assimilation of Great
Wave immigrants (roughly 1880 to 1920). But that wave was followed by a
slowdown of immigration from the 1920s to the 1960s, which allowed newcomers to
assimilate, learn our language, and adapt to our unique system of government.
Also, Great Wave immigrants arrived before the rise of the grievance industry
and identity politics. . . .
. . .
Conservatives should appeal
to immigrants without sacrificing our principles. One way to do this is to
argue that defeating the Gang of Eight bill, with its amnesty and doubling of
legal immigration, would benefit the nearly 60 million American citizens (many
of them immigrants) who are not working. If employers really are having
trouble finding workers, the private-enterprise solution should be to raise the
pay! A tight labor market is the best anti-poverty program. A reduction in
immigration would also take pressure off our already overloaded health-care
system and schools, and it would facilitate the assimilation of immigrants
already here.
Our new report makes clear
that for conservatives, there is no issue more important than reducing the
number of immigrants allowed into the country each year. If legal immigration
is not reduced, it will be nearly impossible for conservatives to be successful
on the issues we care about.
If the Republican party is
to remain a party that is conservative and nationally competitive, it must
defeat amnesty and any proposed increases in legal immigration. Further, we
must work to significantly reduce the number of legal immigrants allowed into
the country from the current level of 1.1 million a year. There is nothing
inevitable about immigration. The level and selection criteria can be changed
by Congress.
Looking at the political
motivation of the groups pushing higher immigration and amnesty, it’s obvious
that the Democrats promote large-scale immigration because it produces more
Democratic votes. If the Republican party is to remain conservative and
nationally competitive, it must defeat amnesty and proposed increases in legal
immigration.
Read the whole thing here.
