E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
So where does Mitt Romney stand on illegal immigration?
While he has positioned himself to the right of his GOP rivals -- in 2008 and now -- an interview he gave to FOX yesterday raised questions about his views, with some even now comparing his words to the language used by supporters of comprehensive immigration reform.
"Truth is, deciphering Romney's statements is a little like reading hieroglyphics," said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice, a pro-immigration reform group. "It may even be sound bites without a policy basis."
Here is what Romney said yesterday:
Romney: “Those people that are here illegally today should have the opportunity to register and to have their status identified. And those individuals should get in line with everyone else that’s in line legally. They should not be placed ahead of the line. They should instead go at the back of the line. And they should not be allowed to stay in this country and be given permanent residency or citizenship merely because they’ve come here illegally.”
Baier: Isn't that what Gingrich is saying?
Romney: “My view’s pretty straightforward: For those people who’ve come here illegally, they should have the opportunity to get in line with everybody else who wants come into this country. But they go to the back of the line. And they should be given no special pathway to citizenship or permanent residency merely because they’ve come here illegally.”
Later, Romney said, “The right course: Secure the border and then we can determine what’s the right way we can deal with the 11 million [illegal immigrants]. And to make it as clear as I possibly can: Let those people apply just like everybody else that wants to come to this country. But they have to apply at the back of the line as opposed to jumping into the front because they’ve come here illegally.”
What's striking to some supporters of comprehensive immigration reform is Romney saying that illegal immigrants must "apply at the back of the line," or that they must "get in line with everyone else that's in line legally." The reason: Advocates of comprehensive immigration reform maintain that illegal immigrants must pay back taxes, learn English, not have a criminal record, and go to the back of the line before obtaining legal status in the United States.
As President Obama said at his town hall at Facebook headquarters back in April, "I think most Americans feel there should be an orderly process to do it. People shouldn't just be coming here and cutting in front of the line essentially and staying without having gone through the proper channels."
So one advocate of comprehensive immigration reform tells First Read that Romney's line -- "For those people who’ve come here illegally, they should have the opportunity to get in line with everybody else who wants come into this country. But they got to the back of the line" -- is consistent with what they're calling for.
"He was for comprehensive immigration reform before he was against it," this advocate says, referring to past statements Romney made in 2006 and 2007 that appeared to endorse this reform. "And now he's trying to get back there."
Eliseo Medina, the SEIU's secretary-treasurer, piles on: "With the Latino vote up for grabs and with pressure from his GOP rival, Romney's wavering position on immigration is being forced out of the shadows sooner than he expected."
But Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes comprehensive immigration reform, believes that Romney's "back of the line" remark means that illegal immigrants must return to their home countries first. That's different, he says, than "the deceptive use of 'back of the line' used by amnesty advocates, where the illegals would get some sort of provisional legal status to stay in the U.S."
Sharry adds that Romney's stance -- according to yesterday FOX interview, as well as other statements -- "seems to be that the 11 million should go home, get in line, apply and be given no special pathway." In other words, it isn't a pro-comprehensive-immigration-reform view. (A Romney aide says to First Read that a "special pathway" refers to any advantage or privilege over those who are waiting in line by virtue of their having come to the United States illegally.)
Indeed, Romney seemed to tell Tim Russert on "Meet the Press" back in late 2007 that illegal immigrants should return to their home countries before obtaining legal status. "Well, whether they go home--they should go home eventually. There's a set per--in my view they should be--they should have a set period during which period they, they sign up for application for permanent residency or, or for citizenship. But there's a set period where upon they should return home. And if they've been approved for citizenship or for a permanent residency, well, they would be a different matter. But for the great majority, they'll be going home."
Romney also said in that "Meet the Press" interview: "My own view is consistent with what you saw in the Lowell Sun, that those people who had come here illegally and are in this country--the 12 million or so that are here illegally--should be able to stay sign up for permanent residency or citizenship, but they should not be given a special pathway, a special guarantee that all of them get to say here for the rest of their lives merely by virtue of having come here illegally."
Is that clear?
Leave a Comment:
You get a more honest answer by, licking your finger and stick up in the air...
LOL!
I conjure up this image of the Obama campaign in their own 'Boiler Room', cranking out commercials on Willard's lack of conviction 24/7...
SO much material... SO little time! ;o)
I thoght it was totally clear Fiesty....Romney stands for whatever most of the voters stand for..
sw philly and Feist,
you forgot to say....Today,...he stands for wherever the wind blows and the voters stand TODAY,...
as Scarlett would say, "...tomorrow is another day..."
sw philly - yep.
Decyphering Romney on immigration? Someone here (forget who) said it best yesterday. Romney is on your side of the issues... regardless of where you stand.
They don't call him Slick Willard the political weathervane for nuthin'
Poor Willard......Blowing in the wind....
That was a statement of pretzel proportions....let's do the twist!
We have gone past the point of ridiculousness with Romney.
He's got to have more "twirly" thoughts than Cain.
Just caught segments of his FOX interview--was FOX playing gotcha with him, or giving him an opportunity to strengthen his position? Looked like a little bit of gotcha to me.
What I have found rather interesting is the media all of a sudden are questioning Romney's different positions now. But I recall that after each debate, he was the one who always got high marks from the media.
"Romney again looked strong at last night's debate" is what I was reading debate after debate.
Romney has NEVER looked strong. He is playing it safe. We the voters have known this all along. It's why his #'s are never that high. But the media has given him a free pass for the most part.
Not everybody of course - but the media in general, yes.
He's a liar. He has zero core beliefs. And it's obvious to all of us that he would be a puppet to the wealthy were he to win. It's why he changes positions so much. He has no positions.
He only knows the Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous, of which he belongs. That's Willard. The GOP as a whole have no positions other than how each position benefits their rich lobbyist friends.
That's the extent of their giving a ####.
It's one big scam. An inside job, with the entire GOP in on it at we the people's expense.
Sounds just like that new movie coming out: Mitt vs. Mitt
I can't wait to see it.
It is good. Four minutes of Mitt being on both sides of every issue. You can trust Mitt for as long as it takes him to change his mind.
I have never figured out what makes him so electable. When his own party doesn't trust him why should I?
So where does Mitt Romney stand on illegal immigration?
What day is it? Depending on where ol' Willard is and who his audience is it could be either he's for it or against it or for it again or could he be against it again. No one, even Mitt knows.
where does king obama stand? and what has he done? Mitt is a lying idiot, but so is the king!!! Speaking of the king or should I say the great devider , remember him saying "were not red or blue, but we are all Americans", talk about talking out of both sides of your a$$. so lets compare.
Notice how Mitt just dances around that little question of whether the 11 million have to go back to their countries of origin before applying for work visas. There is all the double talk and then just a little sentence fragment about going back. Mitt's a carney man! Unfortunately, he gets caught two timing us - almost every time - on almost every issue. Remember that he is "more gay friendly than Senator Kennedy." He hasn't used that line lately, has he? But then he's not in Mass. any more. Wait till he gets to South Carolina. He'll be wearing a Rebel flag.
Poor Mittens. He's terrified of talking to the mainstream media, and now he can't talk to the right wing media either. Who knew being a spineless sleaze of a politician could be so isolating?
I see him sitting by the window of one of his hundred million dollar cabins, looking out wistfully as rain pelts the gold-flaked, stained glass, a single tear falling from the corner of his eye as he sings, "One is the loneliest number that you ever do-oo-oo...Two-oo-oo can be as bad as one..."
Selling America out for a vote or a dollar, just slimy elected officials.
The Mittster and illegal immigration? The Mittster and illegal activities in the Financial Sectors? The Mittster and illegal International Money Laundering by the Insurance Cartels?
Has the Mittster ever had a puppy or a kitten?
And the point of this article was what?
You have to hand it to the obama administration's illegal immigration policy.....just make the country so crappy that everyone will just go home. Brilliant!!
Secure the border before anything sounds good to me!
How much are you willing to spend on that?
It will take more than a fence. You need manpower to grab all the people who climb over with ladders, or under with shovels, or through it with bulldozers. You basically need a Berlin Wall for like 1500 miles of desert.
I read one analysis based on military planning for defensive coverage of linear positions that said the manpower alone for a Border Patrol expansion like that would cost almost half a trillion a year.
We can't do that because it would mean jobs and the Repubbies will let this country go bankrupt before they do anything that might make Obama look like he accomplshed something.
My back of envelope arithmetic suggests a permanent commitment of about 400,000 troops needed to position one set of boots every 100 feet along the 1956 mile Southern US border. Remember, we had a peak number of 456,000 troops in Vietnam trying to secure the South Vietnam border (along with carpet bombing and defoliation).
Pick a number - say $50,000 per set of boots, you get an annual bill of $20 Billion.
Romney 2012 !!!
Romney on illegal immigration: "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!"
Read whatever he said and then read the above to not understand his position.
No one said it better when it comes to Romney. On each and every issue Romney is multiple choice. Thank you Senator Kennedy for that wisdom.
The first Bipartisan commitment to enacting the ‘Legal Workforce Act?’
AMAZING! THIS IS GREAT NEWS! A Democrat with political will, to go against the Liberal Progressive grain. Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA.) has cosponsored House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith's Legal Workforce Act (H.R.2885), making him the first Democrat to do so. In addition Rep. Mark Amodei (R-NV.) added his co-sponsorship to this passage of this law just yesterday. The original co-sponsors to this bill, has been whittled down to only 32 co-sponsors to march it through, to be read in the House. This means we are closing in at a speed not seen before, when it comes to altering the course of illegal immigration. The Mandatory E-Verify systems that will begin to have a powerful effect on the 8.2 illegal aliens, who are taking jobs from average low income American Workers, will soon be confronted in every business to show proof that they are an authorized worker. The demonization by the special interests and all the far left and democrats, who have used every piece of their influence has failed. Mandatory E-Verification is well on its way, to becoming a tough law.
Every law since the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control act has been jeopardized by even the GOP career politicians, as neither party wanted any enforcement. Yes! And it succeeded; otherwise we wouldn't have at least 20 million illegal aliens homesteading in the jurisdiction of the United States. They came by plane and overstayed their visa; they slipped across the border, in any large open regions from the South. They brought their desperate poverty with them, which have further added to our own underprivileged. Taxpayers in America have carried this financial yoke for decades. It's like a repeating record that doesn't sink into those in Congress that taxpayers are forced to by the Supreme Court’s decision, which we must pay for their upbringing.
The bill, which is now officially bipartisan, would require 100% of businesses to begin using E-Verify for all new hires within 2 years and require all federal, state, and local governments to check new hires and existing employees within 6 months. Rep. Altmire represents Pennsylvania's 4th Congressional District and is serving his 3rd term in Congress. He has earned a career grade by pro-sovereignty organization NumbersUSA of B.
Congresswoman Bachmann (R-MN) in the past has co-sponsored legislation to make E-Verify mandatory nationally for all employers, and needs to add her co-sponsorship to Rep. Smith’s Mandatory E-Verify. Then Rep. Ron Paul (R-AN) who has always opposed amnesty, he also refuses to back enforcement measures that would lead to significant attrition of the illegal population. The candidates have no say in introducing or co-sponsoring the ‘Legal Workforce Act, as they cannot vote this powerful enforcement tool into law.
Passing this Law will stop the hounding of the Obama Administration from threatening the States of Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah. The immediate effects will cause hesitation from millions of illegal aliens from arriving through ports of entry, by aircraft or whatever means? ‘Enforcement through Attrition’—forecasts the end of costly deportations, as countless numbers will leave of their own accord. As to the German auto executive, Detlev, or the Japanese Honda worker being taken into custody under the Alabama harsh immigration laws--Perhaps, just perhaps if the 9/11 terrorist murderer Mohamed Atta who was stopped in his vehicle by the police and then let. If this radical had been questioned more extensively, it could have changed the outcome of that dark day?
It is this point in time patriotic Americans should contact the Ways and Means Committee responsible for bringing ‘The Legal Workforce Act’, bill H.R.2885 to the House floor in Congress. Only the American voter or legal resident has a say in this urgent matter, which will decrease large numbers of jobs STOLEN by the 8.2 illegal workers as estimated to self-deport. The number to call for the Washington political phones is 202-224-3121. The legislators need to pay attention to the People, instead of misleading us anymore. If you have further questions read about the widespread corruption in the federal and state governments at ‘Judicial Watch.’ Be attentive that the TEA PARTY does not agree with any kind of Amnesty, Dream Acts or Sanctuary cities.
Controversial as it is, everybody who wants a green card who overstayed their visa, or just slipped through the border, must eventually leave the country to be reevaluated for legal entry. Bringing to America legal immigrants is a different condition altogether and should be promoted expeditiously. The beacon should be lit for the highest skilled workers conceivable, but we must remain sensible and not be hoodwinked by mediocre workers, who could easily end up on the taxpayer’s dime. Build the real fences along our lengthy border, and then we can talk about another ‘Bracero Project’ like during the World War 2 for agriculture.
We have seen the financial damage, crime forced upon us by the impact of illegal immigration. So it’s time for all Americans, whether you are a legally processed resident or birthright citizen this illegal migrant and immigration. This should be bipartisan for every Democrat, Liberal, Independent or Republican to stop this travesty.