When talking about immigration in the GOP, it’s hard to identify which voice to listen to, in view of the different opinions among legislators and politicians.
The fact that there is a variety of ideas reflecting diverse points of view is great. But not all of them have the same value in the internal dispute about what to do with the undocumented. It’s the difference between good intentions and bad actions. This perspective should not be forgotten among immigrant voters and those who have among their priorities a humane treatment of people without papers.
The Republican response to President Obama’s State of the Union address is an example. The general message in English by Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst did not mention immigration. The legislator shares the points of view of Congressman Steve King, also from Iowa, in dubbing Obama’s action “executive amnesty” and opposing a path to citizenship. The strategy was staying mum on immigration, which annoyed some conservatives.
By contrast, in the Republican response for Spanish-speaking immigrants, Florida Congressman Carlos Curbelo did talk about immigration, and asked Obama for cooperation to “modernize the legal immigration system,” among other thing. Curbelo, along with some twenty GOP congressmen, voted against deporting DREAMers and other restrictive measures included in the Homeland Security budget recently approved by the House of Representatives.
It’s a shame that Curbelo’s moderate stance is intended exclusively for the Latin market consumption, while Sen. Ernst is the actual new partisan star.
Who to listen to in the GOP primaries, the moderate Jeb Bush or the list of potential candidates competing to see who can seal the border first or expel more undocumented?
Today we need to see who really has the power in Congress and who are the dominant figures. It’s nice to hear Curbelo’s music, but now people are dancing to the beat imposed by Mr. King and company. That is a huge difference that cannot be ignored