Dems look for ways to fool voters on immigration

LA Times:

Top Democratic elected officials and strategists are engaged in an internal debate over toughening the party's image on illegal immigration, with some worried that Democrats' relatively welcoming stance makes them vulnerable to GOP attacks in the 2008 election.

Advocates of such a change cite local and state election results last week in Virginia and New York, where Democrats used sharper language and get-tough proposals to stave off Republican efforts to paint the party as weak on the issue.

In Virginia, for instance, where Democrats took control of the state Senate, one high- profile victory came in the Washington suburbs, where the winner distributed mailings in the campaign's closing days proclaiming his opposition to in-state college tuition for illegal immigrants.

The party's calibration could also be seen in New York, where a number of Democrats won local elections in part by opposing a plan by Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, and in the presidential campaign, in which party front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has struggled to explain whether she supports the Spitzer plan or not.

In Congress, a group of conservative Democrats, led by freshman Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina, introduced legislation last week calling for more Border Patrol agents, heightened surveillance and additional requirements that employers verify the legal status of workers.

The proposal does not include measures to create a path to citizenship for millions of illegal workers, measures that recently had been supported by Democrats nationally.

With polls showing broad discontent with the government's handling of immigration, some Democrats argue that the party can toughen its image without moving too far away from its traditionally pro-immigration leanings -- for example, by supporting heightened security at the Mexico border, opposing benefits for illegal immigrants, and pushing for harsher penalties against businesses that hire illegal workers.

"If Democrats turn a blind eye to the public concerns about immigration, it would be a mistake," said Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Texas), who won reelection last year in his conservative district by taking a hard line against illegal immigration while backing what he said were "practical" ideas for dealing with the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. "If Democrats are seen as strongly supporting the protection of our borders and not supporting a vast array of welfare benefits for people here illegally, and combine that with a responsible approach toward earned citizenship for those who have been in our country for a number of years, then it can be a winning issue for Democrats."

The internal debate has grown emotional in recent days, boiling over on Friday during a tense encounter on the House floor between Rep. Joe Baca (D-Rialto), chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.).

The caucus was upset because some House Democrats had backed a Republican measure protecting employers that impose certain English-only rules -- the latest in what Baca called a series of frustrations with the party leadership's approach to immigration.

"We're tired of people trying to scapegoat the immigrants or Hispanics as a platform," Baca said. "Republicans have done it, and Democrats have followed . . . because they're afraid they're going to lose their elections. But we got elected to represent all communities, not to vote based on whether we're going to get reelected."

The party's dilemma comes in the wake of the Senate's defeat this summer of a major immigration overhaul that would have created a path to citizenship for illegal workers.

...

The head line in the LA Times was "A fine line for Democrats on border issues." That is a hint as to how they are trying to fool both sides on the issue. It is more evidence that the Democrats are a party whose core beliefs are found in the latest polling data. It is also a party that is largely on the wrong side of the issue trying to please one of its constituency groups that is out of touch with the rule of law when it comes to immigration.