Rep. Goodlatte Emerges as Leading Open Borders Advocate in House

Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr +

Why does Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.) continue to voice support for blanket amnesty and massive increases in immigrants and guest workers?  The best explanation is that he is acting as the mouthpiece for Speaker John Boehner, who is persistently probing to find the path of least resistance to the final passage of the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill – legislation that is extremely unpopular with voters. Boehner’s strategy for achieving this end is to garner enough Republican votes in the House to pass some kind of immigration bill, even a tough enforcement bill, in order to get to conference with the Senate.

In conference, anything opposed by La Raza and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce would almost certainly be stripped out by Harry Reid and Boehner. Such a conference bill would easily be approved by the Senate and open the door to passage in the House where just 17 Republicans, like Goodlatte, would need to join with the Democrats to to make up the 217 votes needed for passage.

Boehner has long been big business’s advocate on the Hill, and with Eric Cantor (R., Va.), Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.), and Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) in key leadership positions, he has surrounded himself with open border acolytes. Goodlatte’s public statements and political posturing over the past few months give every indication that he is on board with the Republican leadership’s plan to abrogate the rule of law in order to drive down wages and conditions for American workers. They are attempting to provide cover for their true intent with the canard that amnesty will win over Hispanic voters to the Republican Party.

Goodlatte told Univision, the largest Spanish-language media outlet in the U.S., that he is “very dedicated” to “finding the appropriate legal status for those who are not here lawfully today,” which he has reiterated means a “pathway to citizenship” for all illegal aliens currently in the country.  Goodlatte has also declared that there would be nothing “special” about this process. When called to the carpet for these statements, Goodlatte duplicitously argued that a “step-by-step approach to immigration reform” that promises future border security and enforcement in exchange for immediate legalization of the illegal alien population is not amnesty, while a comprehensive bill that does exactly the same thing is amnesty.    (This harkens back to Rubio’s assertion that the Gang of Eight bill is not comprehensive because the word isn’t in the title).

If Goodlatte’s goal really is true immigration reform he should call for Boehner to declare that the House will refuse to conference on the Gang of Eight bill. Instead, he should insist on passage of the SAFE Act as a standalone bill, which would be sent to the Senate for consideration. As it stands now, Goodlatte’s posturing sounds a lot like what we heard from Marco Rubio on immigration last year. That is not a good sign.

 

Share.

About Author

avatar

7 Comments

  1. Pingback: Rep. Goodlatte Emerges as Leading Pro Amnesty RINO in House | Truckers

  2. avatar

    It’s understandable why Democrats love illegal immigration. That theoretically leaves but one party that could meet the hopes of those wanting limited and legal immigration. But that has not proven true and those who vote for the GOP because of that hope are fooling themselves. The difference between Democrats loving illegal immigration and Republicans simply not doing anything effective to control it is not great with regards to the end results. There is really only one thing that the GOP elite establishment and donor class, the same group that is against limiting immigration, cares about: taxes. Unless those who want the government to limit immigration and, by extension, control illegal immigration are willing to advocate for severe taxes on the Republican elite establishment, donor class for the unwillingness of the GOP to act effectively, then there will be representation for those against the elites immigration agenda. If you want to change that, taking their money is like the only thing that will work.

  3. avatar
    Concerned Citizen on

    Is Goodlatte another self-annihilating “conservative” who can’t stand up to special interest pressures? This article makes it appear so.

    I’ve called several House offices today to make my voice heard, but to reiterate, it is INSANE for the GOP to give a pathway to citizenship to people who came here illegally and who are assured to vote Democrat. I don’t want to live in a one-party country, but that would be the legacy of this radical proposal. If someone crosses our sovereign borders ILLEGALLY, they ought to be glad we don’t arrest and deport them as other advanced countries do. Instead, we bow to all sorts of pressure and give them CITIZENSHIP? That is crazy, and stupid, and not in the best interest of this country.

    • avatar

      It’s laughable for the Republicans to think they are going to get anything more than a tiny increase in the Latino vote. No matter what they do, the Democrats will OUTPROMISE them. There are lots of middle of the road voters who agree with the Republican hard line on immigration and little else. Why the Republicans would give up that advantage with those voters for the handful of votes they might get from Latinos is a mystery.

      • avatar

        Not really….the majority of Americans want immigration reform……it is only a minority that is against>>>>>like you>>>>who thinks it is bad..you could not possibly be more wrong…..do not so it…..and soon your descendants will be Mexican…..in a way your genes will be stronger for the tougher jobs…so somehow you will improve yourself……

        SO DO NOTHING and expect the worse……………………do not cry wolf later………..

        • avatar

          You can come up with all the fake names you want. You’re still selling the same old troll baloney.

      • avatar

        The party’s donor class has always been for mass immigration in the service of its economic interests. While the long-term results of amnesty will be bad for the party, the economic benefits that can be realized by the donor class are more immediate. It’s future Republicans that will pay price, unless people decide that those who are responsible for the impending disaster should pay the price.