NEW CASTLE —
Last Tuesday wasn’t exactly a debacle for Republicans.
But from some of the reaction coming out of the GOP, you might make that assumption.
Apparently, many Republicans expected big gains from this year’s general election, up to and including a recapturing of the White House. Instead, the results left both parties pretty much where they had been, with barely perceptible gains by Democrats in Washington.
So the GOP has formed one of those circular firing squads that often occur after disappointing elections, with various entities taking shots at each other for costing the party votes.
Much of that will work out over time. But one issue that now seems to be on the Republican agenda is new-found support for immigration reform.
This follows election results showing that Latino voters overwhelmingly went Democratic this election, helping Barack Obama and others in his party score wins. It’s been noted that George W. Bush was able to capture 40 percent of the Latino vote, but Mitt Romney garnered just 27 percent.
The big reason? The view that Republican hostility to immigration reform had significant racial overtones to it.
After Tuesday’s election results began to sink in, Republicans increasingly have called for rethinking the way the party handles immigration issues.
This could get interesting.
That’s because immigration is one of those topics where the differences between Republicans and Democrats are fuzzy at best. While many in both parties support more generous immigration rules, there is also bipartisan opposition to such moves.
In fact, I think it’s safe to say Republicans have picked up the support of traditionally Democratic working-class whites in recent elections with policies that oppose more liberal immigration rules. But that backing fails to offset growing Latino support for Democrats.
Historically, the business community has embraced liberal immigration policies. More immigrants mean more workers competing for jobs.
However, many conservatives view immigration (legal and illegal) as a means for outsiders to tap into America’s entitlements, health care and other programs.
On the Democratic side, supporters of more open immigration tout this as part of the American dream. But some in the party object to expanded immigration because of the potential to lower labor costs and out of concern for the environment.
More people mean more consumption, more energy use, more sprawl and more degradation of nature.
So if both parties now say they want to reform immigration rules, does this take the issue off the political table? Not necessarily.
“Reform” comes in many shapes. The two parties may embrace immigration reform in theory, while continuing to squabble over it in practice.
You may have noticed that happens a lot in Washington.
Mitchel Olszak
Related Photos
-
Mitchel Olszak, Dear Reader
Discussion
Mitchel Olszak: Is this a new era for immigration reform? Maybe not
- Mitchel Olszak
-
-
Mitchel Olszak: Snooping threat to the free press
In “All the President’s Men,” reporter Bob Woodward conducts late-night meetings with a source in a parking garage. That source, Deep Throat (later revealed to be high-ranking FBI official Mark Felt), was worried that he would be exposed as a tipster in the Watergate scandal.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Toomey takes a chance on guns
How does a conservative Republican senator representing a state with a Democratic majority protect himself politically? One way is to take positions that tend to straddle the nation’s ideological fence.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Terrorists strive to create fear
The finish line of a road race serves as the division between one world and another. Ahead of the finish line, there is structure and discipline, with attention paid to the runners as they cross over. Spectators are kept back, mainly to avoid interfering with the participants — and perhaps to keep them from being trampled.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Kelly, allies battle arms treaty
Supporters of the right to bear arms have a champion in Congressman Mike Kelly. The federal lawmaker, whose district includes most of Lawrence County, has been making waves with his criticism of the Obama administration and its support for the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
-
Mitchel Olszak: I like beer, so I’m watching our state closely
I like beer. More to the point, I like good beer. In my younger days, just about any swill would do. But with the passage of time, sophistication and exposure to the possibilities, my interests in beer have sharpened and matured.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Political lessons from distant past hold value today
If you want to gain an appreciation for great thinkers, read some of history’s major political philosophies. Here you will find the works of Plato, Machiavelli, Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, St. Augustine and many others. They explored difficult social issues and offered serious insight.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Do the emotional centers of the brain guide our politics?
People who hold specific political points of view like to think their positions are based on serious analysis. They view their given ideologies as careful conclusions reached through assessing the world around them and examining how things work. Thus, liberals and conservatives both manage to claim the intellectual and ethical high ground.
-
Mitchel Olszak: Will GOP survive current divisions?
Somebody asked me the other day if I thought the Republican Party was about to split apart. I said no. It was an assessment based on history. Creating a new political party in America is a challenging process. They occasionally crop up, but they don’t last.
-
Mitchel Olszak: History as a matter of chance
History is full of pivotal moments. What if Socrates had decided against drinking that hemlock? What if Gutenberg hadn’t developed his printing press? What if Washington’s army failed to survive the winter at Valley Forge? What if Edison gave up on inventing the light bulb?
-
Mitchel Olszak: Pennsylvanians shouldn’t be fooled by electoral hijinks
Back in the 2000 presidential election, Americans received a civics lesson of sorts. Much of it involved obscure terms such as hanging and dimpled chads, as well as butterfly ballots. All of this, of course, came courtesy of Florida, whose clumsy election efforts produced an extended period of uncertainty in the presidential contest between George W. Bush and Al Gore.
- More Mitchel Olszak Headlines
-
