Thread: CPAC Disappoints on Immigration - Again

CPAC Disappoints on Immigration – Again


By Marguerite Telford, February 28, 2017


Last week's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), like those in the prior two years, had little to offer people in favor of immigration enforcement and reduced immigration. So it shouldn't be surprising that the beginning of this posting is almost the same as the posting on immigration at CPAC 2016, where the key immigration event focused on how to talk to minorities; Mike Madrid claimed the GOP risked becoming "irrelevant" if the party didn't embrace amnesty and high immigration levels. His advice was ignored by candidate Trump. This year the four-day conference, addressed by President Trump, once again made no attempt to have a meaningful immigration conversation.



CPAC's website states the conference "combines ideas with action to leverage the strength of thousands of grass-root activists to break through the resistance of Washington's powerful elite." Yet, the event provided neither a forum for true discussion and debate of immigration policies, nor a detailed review and explanation of Trump's immigration actions thus far. Activists left with little additional knowledge of the problems or viable solutions with which to go to town halls and defend what many of them voted for – decreased legal immigration, border security, and interior enforcement.



The only panel on the main issue which put Trump into office was entitled "If Heaven has a Gate, a Wall, and Extreme Vetting, What Can't America?" It featured Representatives Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) and Ken Buck (R-Colo.), both members of the House Judiciary subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security; Mike Gonzales of the Heritage Foundation; and Helen Krieble of the Vernon K. Krieble Foundation.



Instead of two non-profit participants focused on specific areas (Gonzales discussed assimilation and Krieble made her perennial pitch for a hugely expanded guest worker program), attendees would have benefitted from hearing an expert like Professor George Borjas speaking to the labor impact of immigration. Borjas could have addressed how, as he wrote in the New York Times recently, "immigration does not improve everyone's well-being. There are winners and losers, and we will need to choose among difficult options. The improved lives of the immigrants come at a price. How much of a price are the American people willing to pay, and exactly who will pay it?" A meaningful debate would have included a discussion on the solution to the job magnet and an appeal to participants to push their legislators to pass an E-Verify bill.


Perhaps with so many students in attendance, this would have been a great forum to discuss the number of foreign students we bring in every year and their impact on education and the job market. Another idea: an expert like John Miano could have focused on how employers game the H-1B program for cheap foreign labor and some things Trump can do to fix it.



If CPAC were serious about the immigration issue and sending participants back out into the fray to push for Trump's immigration agenda, they might have had a panel discussing serious legislation being moved forward on these pressing issues.




But these topics were either not discussed or were given a mere casual mention. As relates to immigration, few ideas were provided last week and participants were sent home with no direction on any action to take to support Trump's agenda. Maybe organizers weren't serious about leveraging "the strength of thousands of grass-root activists to break through the resistance of Washington's powerful elite" on the immigration issue.



http://cis.org/telford/cpac-disappoi...igration-again

CPAC disappoints on immigration because Matt Schlapp of CPAC and his wife, Mercedes Schlapp, as well as others there are for amnesty. She is a regular Fox News commentator saying President Trump is only going to deport criminal illegal aliens.

Mike Madrid claimed the GOP risked becoming "irrelevant" if the party didn't embrace amnesty and high immigration levels.

This kind of ludicrous comments just irk me to no end. How can folks like this be so idiotic on the immigration topic? Things will actually be reversed to what he's saying. Embrace amnesty and continuing legal immigration at a high number will certainly mean the death of the GOP.

Everyone knows a vast majority of illegals will vote on Democrats when they become citizens. People who live with their hand out, relying on government subsidies, normally vote Democrat. It's no secret many of the folks residing here illegal have a very weak educational background and are destined for low paying jobs.

CPAC has never invited any of the anti-amnesty groups like ALIPAC, NumbersUSA, or FAIR to their party. I went one year with some friends, but did not feel welcome by the organizers.

W

Originally Posted by GeorgiaPeach

CPAC disappoints on immigration because Matt Schlapp of CPAC and his wife, Mercedes Schlapp, as well as others there are for amnesty. She is a regular Fox News commentator saying President Trump is only going to deport criminal illegal aliens.

That's because Mercedes is an immigrant from Cuba.

At around 6:00-9:00 minutes you can here Mercedes Schlapp talk about Candidate Trump and critique his words and message on illegal immigration. She talks about the 11 million and the big beautiful door.


Catholic Network, ETWN.




https://youtu.be/nq1udRQNhWA

Over the years CPAC has changed from a conservative event to a Republican one.