Thread: Ruben Navarrette: Gingrich and the politics of good

Ruben Navarrette: Gingrich and the politics of good
San Gabriel Valley Tribune (California)
December 4, 2011 Sunday
OPINION

WITH Newt Gingrich being attacked for his common-sense immigration proposal by purists on both the right and the left, someone should defend the former House speaker.

Glad to do it. The perfect can't be the enemy of the good. What Gingrich proposes isn't perfect, but it is pretty good. He wants to create what he calls "a path to legality" for people with deep ties to this country so as to not split up families. Illegal immigrants could receive work permits so they could remain in the United States and keep their families intact. They would no longer be hunted by headline-grabbers such as Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., or swept up by the Obama administration's deportation machine.

There is a catch. Illegal immigrants wouldn't get U.S. citizenship in the bargain. They could still become citizens, but they'd have to do it by returning to their home countries, then re-entering the United States legally and going through proper channels to become naturalized. They'd get the steak, but no sauce.

This could work. Citizenship and the voting privileges that come with it have always been less important to the immigrants themselves than to Democrats who salivate at the thought of millions of new voters with a grudge against Republicans. I've spoken to many illegal immigrants, and what they want is to work and support their families without being hassled. Most do not have a burning desire to go into the voting booth and choose the lesser of two evils.

For the right-wingers, who like to boil down their opposition to slogans that fit on bumper stickers, a work-permit plan is "amnesty." For the left-wingers, who like to hold Republicans to high standards regarding how they treat immigrants while holding President Obama to no standards whatsoever, it is a formula for second-class status.

Actually, it's neither. Those are merely buzzwords that the right and the left throw out to rile up the faithful. What Gingrich proposes - i.e., the "red-card solution" designed by the Denver-based Vernon K. Krieble Foundation, where illegal immigrants would get red cards signifying that they have the legal right to work - would certainly be an improvement on what we have now. Besides, given the vacuous nature of our politics, a candidate should get credit for being bold enough to propose an idea and stand by it. Most candidates play it safe and simply criticize the proposals of others, while telling audiences what they want to hear.

That's not how Newt rolls. And this is one reason why Gingrich snagged the endorsement of one of New Hampshire's most influential newspapers, the Union Leader, even though Romney - as the former governor of neighboring Massachusetts - was thought to have the inside track.

The front-page editorial went like this: "We look for conservatives of courage and conviction who are independent-minded, grounded in their core beliefs about this nation and its people, and best equipped for the job. ... In this incredibly important election, that candidate is Newt Gingrich."

The right needs to grow up. It's not enough to just repeat the word "amnesty" 10 times a day as a way of short-circuiting the immigration debate. We need to hear real solutions and real ideas, and those who can offer neither should get out of the way. If the red-card solution isn't the way to go, then what would Romney or any other Gingrich critic propose that we do with the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States? They never tell us.

The left needs to grow up as well. Liberals turn up their noses at Gingrich's half a loaf, and insist that it isn't enough. Yet they gush over the crumbs from the Obama administration. The president promises reform while Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano promises everyone else "a very robust" deportation policy. This "good cop/bad cop" routine is wearing thin.

Both camps have strong views about what should happen in a perfect world. The right thinks that millions of illegal immigrants will just voluntarily go home if we're mean to them, and the left thinks that they can all stay, become U.S. citizens and join the PTA.

As far as the extremes are concerned, those are perfect outcomes. But they are mirages. These things are never going to happen.

What Newt Gingrich has in mind probably wouldn't fare well in a perfect world. Yet it could be awfully useful in the real one.

ruben@rubennavarrette.com .

Ruben Navarrette is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.
December 5, 2011

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/En ... =7&start=3

Kreible Red Card Proponents who don't include a mandatory departure date are Loctite Losers.

"Red Carpet Card"