Is Scott Walker’s Immigration Stance Change Genuine or a Political Ploy?

Written by:

Published on: April 23, 2015

It has begun. Breitbart reported that 2016 GOP presidential election nominee hopeful Gov. Scott Walker has changed his stance on immigration earning him the ire of “the entire political establishment” and the praise of conservative activists. But what exactly is Walker’s position and what was it before?

According to the Washington Post and a previous article on Freedom Outpost, Walker’s previous stance on immigration was offering illegal alien invaders a pathway to citizenship. However, last month, in an interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News, Walker seemed to abandon his previous stance, making his intent more clear instead of continuing the circular fashion regarding his stance in the past.

Walker stated, “I look at the problems we’ve experienced for the last few years. I’ve talked to governors on the border and others out there. I’ve talked to people all across America. And the concerns I have is that we need to secure the border. We ultimately need to put in place a system that works. A legal immigration system that works. And part of doing this is put the onus on the employers, getting them E-verify and tools that do that. But I don’t think you get it through amnesty.”

Walker states the US needs “a legal immigration system that works.” The US has an immigration system that does work and has worked for quite some time. Granted, there are some burps, such as those applying legally for immigration having long wait times. However, the problems the US is experiencing with illegal immigration at this point in time has to do with the lack of enforcement of our immigration laws due to the criminal Obama issuing a “policy” for those laws not to be enforced. Not only is the director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement breaking the law by not following the law, Obama has basically sent an open invitation for anyone and everyone, except Middle Eastern Christians who are being murdered in a 21st century religious holocaust, to “come on in and make yourself at home” while promising impunity for breaking US immigration law.

Is it really the “legal immigration” system that is “broken?”

Walker states that the US needs “to secure the border.” That is exactly spot on. However, US citizens have been promised a “secure border” in the past only to be sold out when caving to the “government” demands on past amnesty or other issues involving illegal alien invaders. There’s never enough money to secure the border, it angers our neighboring countries, it’s a logistics nightmare, fences don’t work, or any other host of reasons – more like excuses – the borders are never secured. Citizens are tired of excuses and statements to “secure the border”; they want action. Once the border is secure, then the focus could be on deportation of those here illegally – another of their stances. Deportation and border security go hand in hand and should be done at the same time.

Another of Walker’s solutions would be to “put the onus on employers, giving them E-verify and tools that do that.” It sounds good at the outset; but, in order for E-verify to be effective, every individual applying for a job, including US citizens, would be run through the “government system.” The government is already too heavily involved in micromanaging the lives of citizens. Is Walker now suggesting that citizens “jump through another hoop” just to obtain a job? One of the enumerated powers of the federal government is “rules for naturalization” and its enforcement. The government needs to enforce policies on employers who knowingly hire illegal alien invaders – not put the monkey on the back of the employer.

Walker has got it right on amnesty, which is a position that many can support as long as he can recognize the fallibility in some of his other statements.

On legal immigration, Walker’s new stance is showing his support for America by standing by what is good for America and American workers.

According to the Washington Post:

“In terms of legal immigration, how we need to approach that going forward is … to make decisions about a legal system that’s based on, first and foremost, protecting American workers looking for jobs, what is this doing to wages, and we need to have that at the forefront of our discussion going forward,” Walker said.

Walker’s new stance has earned the support of some conservatives, among them, Phyllis Schlafly. Schlafly stated in an email, “I’m thrilled to see that Scott Walker wants to defend American jobs and understands that American voters are directly impacted by immigration – legal and illegal.”

Bill Kristol, Weekly Standard editor, agreed with Schlafly saying, “Anyone’s free, obviously, to disagree with what Walker said. But what strikes me is that the establishment types seemed offended that he even dared say it.”

According to the Washington Post, Walker’s new stance, while not only against his past stance, is now at odds with establishment Republicans and research on the economic effects of immigration. Republicans have long held they wanted to stop illegal immigration and oppose amnesty for illegal alien invaders who are residing in the nation. But, Republicans have not ever opposed a limit on legal immigration. This has earned Walker their criticism.

What about Walker’s stance on legal immigration is bad? Nothing. US citizens have long held an affection for legal immigrants who come to this nation through legal means. However, the US currently has a tremendous number of its population unemployed, under-employed and stopped looking for work. The economy is holding on by a thread even though Washington, aka Obama, is trying to convince the population otherwise. In difficult financial times of the nation, it is in the best interest of the people, national sovereignty and economic security to limit legal immigration to retain solvency of the citizenry. Other nations of the world will limit their legal immigration population entering on those same grounds. The US should not be any different. While we are a nation that stands on freedom and upholding of individual rights, those who are citizens of other countries are required to make application and be approved to enter in order to protect our nation’s security, which includes its economy. Our nation and its citizens have a right to be secure economically. Unlimited legal immigration does not do that.

Walker’s new stance has earned him the support of former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, who stated to Breitbart that he is not endorsing in the 2016 cycle. Breitbart contends that Brown’s support will “go a long way in the first-in-the-nation primary state” and in New Hampshire where Brown is influential.

It is too early to tell whether Walker’s change in stance on immigration will make a difference with conservative voters. With all the support Walker is currently receiving from notable conservative activists and commentators, it is possible conservatives could find in Walker a partner on immigration. Since Walker is willing to re-evaluate his stance, it may be possible for him to see some flaws in his current one as he did his past one. This is only one issue and Walker will have to present conservative views on others as well that are a priority for conservatives. Walker also has another challenge. He has to “walk the walk” as well as “talk the talk” to win conservative support.

Don't forget to like on Facebook, Google+, & Twitter.
The opinions expressed in each article are the opinions of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of
Check out Sons of Liberty Polls on LockerDome on LockerDome
Comment via Facebook
Comment via Disqus