Steve Kagen & the Politics of Immigration

First we have WI-8 Democratic Congressman Steve Kagen opposing the Obama administration's lawsuit to stop the Arizona immigration law:

The action taken today by the U.S. Attorney General distracts our nation from addressing the real challenges we face: securing our borders, enforcing all our immigration laws, and stopping illegal immigration. Lawyers in Washington cannot secure our borders or catch those who break our laws. Arizona has asked for our help, not a federal lawsuit.

Kagen sees the short time frame between now and November and knows he will not have to cast a vote on immigration, which means issuing this statement has almost no downside. The upside is that it provides at least partial cover on an issue that will be on voter's minds right through the election. Voters in WI-8 should not be fooled. This is nothing more than political positioning. There is no doubt in my mind that if Kagen were re-elected and a Democrat sponsored immigration bill came up in the next Congress, he would support it regardless of what was in it. Kagen has demonstrated a willingness to support the national Democrat agenda, regardless how those issues impact his district.

On the other hand we have Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention interviewed on NPR:

As a leading evangelical conservative, Richard Land's credentials are impeccable. He heads the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, and from that influential perch he's been urging his fellow conservatives to rethink their opposition to the immigration overhaul.

"I've had some of them appeal to me. They say, 'Richard, you're going to divide the conservative coalition.' And I said, 'Well, I may divide the old conservative coalition, but I'm not going to divide the new one.' "

Land adds, "If the new conservative coalition is going to be a governing coalition, it's going to have to have a significant number of Hispanics in it, that's dictated by demographics, and you don't get large numbers of Hispanics to support you when you're engaged in anti-Hispanic immigration rhetoric."

I heard Paul Krugman on a recent episode of ABC's This Week state that the cultural-right segment of the GOP is hostile to immigrants and that it had absolutely taken over the party. I would say that Dr. Land is pretty much emblematic of the cultural-right segment, and he sounds anything but anti-immigrant in this interview.

I'm sorry to break it to Dr. Land, but regardless of whether or not he is correct, the electorate simply isn't in any mood to agree with him. The only thing elected officials are safe to say during this election cycle is that we need to secure the borders, period. This means that Land's appeal will likely fall on deaf ears. This is where Kagen's hollow rhetoric ought to end up as well.

If Only Scott Walker Read This Blog

Late last week Republican candidate for governor Scott Walker indicated he had serious concerns about Arizona's immigration law. A stance that was very surprising since the Walker campaign appears to be centered on reflecting the views of Wisconsin Republicans rather than shaping them.

For a moment there it looked like we might be witnessing one of those moments when popular notions about a politician are so entrenched he is able to stake out unpopular positions without incurring a political cost.

Alas, it was not to be.

Walker quickly shifted his position once the unpopularity of his first stance became clear. If only someone from the Walker campaign read this blog, they could have saved themselves a lot of trouble over the last few days. From Tuesday, 5/11:

candidates just about everywhere should be warned that comprehensive immigration reform is a campaign killer. The ONLY thing you should say when asked about immigration is that we need to secure the border. The ONLY thing you should say when asked about Arizona's new immigration law is that we need to secure the border. Period.

Instead, Walker has become the latest member of the "against it before I was for it club", and it couldn't have come at a worse time, right before the state party convention. The site of which will now be witness to the Walker camp reassuring suddenly jittery party activists rather than the triumphant sendoff they may have been envisioning just a few short days ago.

Next!

Hope you weren't planning on catching your breath anytime soon:

Open Congress reports:

While Congress continues to plow full steam ahead on health care, Democrats in the House recently took a big step forward on another huge and contentious issue, immigration. On Tuesday, Rep. Solomon Ortiz [D, TX-27] and Rep. Luis Gutierez [D, IL-4] introduced comprehensive immigration reform legislation that will serve as the starting point for Congress’ work on the issue this session....

H.R. 4132 – Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Prosperity and Security Act of 2009

As a first step on immigration reform for the 111th session of Congress, it’s pretty aggressive. The bill touches on just about all elements of immigration reform, from border security to foreign worker visas to employment eligibility verification. It generally follows the same framework of the comprehensive immigration bills that were attempted by the 110th Congress under President Bush and failed mainly because of public opposition to providing a process for immigrants who are currently undocumented to eventually become legal residents.

Is there a sense anywhere that public opinion on immigration has changed since the last time this was attempted? Given the low opinion of Congress, I would think that sentiment on immigration would have to have improved dramatically since then, something that I see little evidence of.

On the up-side, at some point we are simply going to run out of big issues to tackle. At which point we will no doubt begin tackling the unforeseen consequences of our earlier actions.