If it's in the News, it's in our Polls. Public opinion polling since 2003.

POLITICAL COMMENTARY

So Mixed Up on Immigration

A Commentary By Froma Harrop

Right-wing primary voters booted Eric Cantor over signs he might back "amnesty" for illegal immigrants, it is said. If so, the partisans are once again taking a position totally opposed to what they claim to want. Legalizing the status of most undocumented foreigners is the condition for closing the door on future illegal immigration. There is no other politically passable road to get there.

One may err in assuming that the hard right actually desires to solve the problem, punishing others being the more satisfying activity. The targets would include both Republicans not dancing to the right's dissonant tune and brown people in general.

Thing is, illegal immigrants are in this country because they can hold jobs here. And they can hold the jobs because American immigration laws were made to not work.

Thus, the tea party brethren are correct in arguing that past immigration bills offered amnesty for millions without stopping the illegal flow. Also, another amnesty without enforcement would only encourage millions more to enter the United States without proper documents.

Unfortunately, the right wing hasn't noticed -- or doesn't want to concede -- that the bipartisan immigration reform approved by the Senate is different. It fixes the enforcement part.

The plan would require biometric identification (for example, a fingerprint or the iris of an eye) of all job applicants. That means a stolen or fake Social Security card would no longer pass as acceptable ID. Furthermore, all businesses would have to use E-Verify, an Internet-based system, to confirm the prospective hire's right to work in the United States.

Many on the right insist that President Obama cannot be trusted to enforce an improved immigration law. That is odd because Obama is the first president to take the current flawed law seriously -- so seriously that a leading immigration advocate has condemned him as "deporter in chief."

Also note what happened when Obama -- frustrated over inaction on reform and pressed by immigrant activists -- did consider easing up on the deportations. Sen. Chuck Schumer, a Democrat pushing the changes, warned him not to. The reforms would not pass if the public thought enforcement might be subject to presidential whim.

One suspects that many right-wingers would rather see their teeth fall out and cars repossessed than make common cause with Obama -- even on an issue with which they have common cause. Again, populist movements fueled by emotion often bypass achieving goals in favor of nurturing resentments. It's less work that way.

Speaking of politics, it is beyond weird that Idaho Republican Raul Labrador has put himself forward as the right's champion to replace Cantor as House majority leader. Labrador opposes

He is something of a cheap-labor twofer: Create more competition for our lowest-paid service workers while keeping undocumented workers vulnerable and thus unable to demand higher wages.

A word about the concern over "rewarding lawbreakers." The right should drop it. The vast majority of illegal immigrants are good, hardworking people. And the laws they broke were laws that our business and political leaders held in contempt.

The proposed reforms would make clear to employers, future illegal entrants and politicians that our immigration laws are not to be winked at. It would be strange if Republicans willing to go forth were threatened by a political faction that claims to hate the status quo while doing everything in its power to perpetuate it. Strange, but not the first time.

Follow Froma Harrop on Twitter @FromaHarrop. She can be reached at [email protected]. To find out more about Froma Harrop and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2014 CREATORS.COM

See Other Political Commentary

See Other Commentaries by Froma Harrop.

Views expressed in this column are those of the author, not those of Rasmussen Reports.  Comments about this content should be directed to the author or syndicate.

Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.

We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter and various media outlets across the country.

Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $4.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on upcoming elections, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.

To learn more about our methodology, click here.