Thread: Critics Say Politics Driving Immigration Hearings

http://www.nytimes.com

August 7, 2006
Critics Say Politics Driving Immigration Hearings
By RACHEL L. SWARNS
WASHINGTON, Aug. 6 — When House leaders announced their plan to hold 21 immigration hearings in 13 states during the August recess, they said it demonstrated a commitment to battling illegal immigration and securing the border.

But some Democratic and Republican lawmakers said the schedule of the hearings had only heightened their concerns that the Republican leadership was using immigration as a weapon in the battle over fiercely contested House and Senate seats around the country.

Several immigration hearings are being held far from the border with Mexico, in districts where Republican lawmakers are engaged in competitive races for the House, including Evansville, Ind.; Concord, N.H.; and Glens Falls, N.Y. Hearings are also being held in Dubuque, Iowa, where Republicans are fighting to hold on to the seat being vacated by Representative Jim Nussle, and in Hamilton, Mont., where Senator Conrad Burns faces a tough challenge.

Jeff Lungren, a spokesman for the House Judiciary Committee, which set hearings in four battleground districts, said more than 60 members of the House had asked for immigration hearings in their hometowns.

Lawmakers and political analysts say the hearings may help vulnerable Republicans by rallying conservatives, who view Democrats as being weak on border security, and by drawing attention away from other issues like the war in Iraq and President Bush’s diminished approval ratings.

“Of course it’s not happenstance,” said Representative Jim Kolbe, Republican of Arizona, who is not running for re-election. He would rather have House Republicans negotiating with the Senate for a compromise on immigration legislation as opposed to the hearings, like the one set for his district, where Republicans are battling to hold on to his seat.

“They are very deliberately planned,” Mr. Kolbe said of the hearings. “A lot of Republicans are listening to a very shrill part of their base who are very loud about this issue, and they believe that this translates into votes in the base.”

Carl Forti, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said his committee had nothing to do with the hearings. Kevin Smith, a spokesman for Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the majority leader, said the House committee chairmen had decided where the hearings would be held.

Mr. Lungren said many of the hearings were being held in border states where border security and illegal immigration from Mexico were critical concerns among voters. But he did not rule out the possibility that politics had played a role in the scheduling of the hearings.

“Policy is the substance of an issue,” said Mr. Lungren, the spokesman for Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. “Politics is helping to explain the substance of it. The two go hand in hand.”

Bruce Braley, a lawyer and the Democratic contender in the Iowa race, dismissed the immigration hearing scheduled for his district as “classical grandstanding.”

“There must be some perception that it’s going to stir up some voters,” Mr. Braley said. “I welcome a discussion on immigration, especially the failures of the Bush administration. They have a very sorry record on border security.”

Meanwhile, Congressional Democrats have accused Republicans of playing politics instead of moving an immigration bill to Mr. Bush’s desk.

In May, the Senate passed legislation that would tighten border security, create a guest worker program and ultimately grant citizenship to most illegal immigrants after they pay fines and back taxes and enroll in English classes. The president continues to indicate that he supports this approach.

But in December, the House passed a bill that focused solely on toughening border security and immigration enforcement. House Republicans decided to hold hearings to rally support for their approach before working with the Senate on a compromise.

Last week, several Republican state chairmen described the hearings as useful and said they might improve their candidates’ prospects.

Murray Clark, chairman of the Indiana Republican Party, said he thought the hearing in Evansville might invigorate conservative voters to support Representative John Hostettler, a Republican who supports tough border security measures.

Ray Hoffmann, chairman of the Iowa Republican Party, said the hearing in Dubuque would put the spotlight on the Republican candidate, Mike Whalen, and his proposal to create a tough employment verification system for immigrant workers.

“It’s an issue that continues to be in the news in that district,” Mr. Hoffmann said. “As people continue to talk about it, they’ll continue to see that Mike has a solution.”

Republicans who believe that immigration is a winning issue point to the special election in June in Southern California for the House seat vacated by Randy Cunningham, who pleaded guilty to bribery charges.

In that race, the Republican candidate, Brian P. Bilbray, a former congressman, defeated his Democratic challenger after he attacked her as being weak on illegal immigration.

“The special election in California really got a lot of people, not just Republicans, but also Democrats, to say this is an issue we should be watching out for,” said Amy Walter, an analyst with the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

“What he was able to effectively do is take the race off the issues that are most problematic for Republicans and make it about an issue where he could present himself as more aligned with voters,” Ms. Walter said of Mr. Bilbray.

Some Republicans warn, however, that the immigration issue could backfire, particularly if Democrats pound away at what they characterize as the failures of the Bush administration and the Republican-controlled Congress to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

“It’s certainly possible that we could have the issue stolen right from under us,” said Representative Tom Tancredo, Republican of Colorado, who is a leading advocate of tough immigration laws.

But Scott Tranchemontagne, a campaign spokesman for Representative Charles Bass, Republican of New Hampshire, remains hopeful. He said Mr. Bass had voted in favor of the House border security legislation.

“It can only help,” Mr. Tranchemontagne said of the immigration hearing scheduled for his state. “It’s an issue we’re pretty strong on.”

My dear Rachel,
if you had come to this website first, you would have found out
that it's Communist La Raza that's the driving force
influencing the hearings and the Congress (especially the Senate).


hell, Rachel, go talk to Hillary - she's a Communist.