Paul Ryan’s Immigration Litmus Test

The potential speaker has already promised that he won’t tackle comprehensive immigration reform this year.

Rep. Paul Ryan
AP Photo/Eric Gay
Oct. 21, 2015, 6:31 p.m.

Paul Ry­an rose in front of his con­fer­ence and made a pledge Tues­day night. He would not push for com­pre­hens­ive im­mig­ra­tion re­form this ses­sion if elec­ted speak­er.

Ry­an’s prom­ise was hardly bold, nor was it sur­pris­ing. A ma­jor­ity of the Re­pub­lic­an Con­fer­ence in the House has shown little ap­pet­ite for tack­ling  sweep­ing changes to the coun­try’s im­mig­ra­tion sys­tem. And, after Pres­id­ent Obama en­acted ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tions to pro­tect “Dream­ers” and their par­ents from de­port­a­tion, the well of good­will has pretty been “poisoned,” as Boehner once de­clared. Ry­an said he was open to in­creas­ing bor­der se­cur­ity and in­tern­al en­force­ment, but he won’t be tack­ling any more-mod­er­ate re­forms in the 114th Con­gress.

In the near-term, the po­ten­tial for Re­pub­lic­an change on im­mig­ra­tion is nonex­ist­ent. Out on the cam­paign trail, Re­pub­lic­ans see that their base is head over heels for prom­ises com­ing from GOP pres­id­en­tial fron­trun­ner Don­ald Trump to build a bor­der wall and de­port il­leg­al im­mig­rants.  Now is not the time for im­mig­ra­tion re­form in the Re­pub­lic­an-con­trolled Con­gress. Nor is a path­way to cit­izen­ship the path to vic­tory for Paul Ry­an.

Ry­an’s vow re­veals just how much he is up against as he makes his case to the House Free­dom Caucus. Every po­s­i­tion Ry­an has ever taken is un­der scru­tiny, but his dy­nam­ic past on im­mig­ra­tion re­form has taken cen­ter stage as right wing ra­dio hosts, com­ment­at­ors and law­makers pro­claim that it’s a lit­mus test for Ry­an’s fu­ture as speak­er.

“Suf­fice it to say that Lu­is Gu­ti­er­rez has en­dorsed Paul Ry­an be­cause of Paul Ry­an’s open-bor­ders and am­nesty po­s­i­tion,” Rep. Mo Brooks, a mem­ber of the Free­dom Caucus, said about the Demo­crat­ic law­maker’s work with Ry­an on im­mig­ra­tion. “That is dis­con­cert­ing with the vast ma­jor­ity of Amer­ic­an voters.”

Trump—the fa­vor­ite of many con­ser­vat­ive voters—blas­ted Ry­an on Wed­nes­day on ABC say­ing Ry­an was “weak on im­mig­ra­tion.” And Breit­bart “un­earthed” a 2013 video this week of Ry­an speak­ing out in sup­port of im­mig­ra­tion re­form and prom­ising that he and Gu­ti­er­rez were “do­ing everything” they could to en­sure that Con­gress took ac­tion.

Ry­an has been clear. After run­ning in 2012 along­side Mitt Rom­ney, who de­clared that im­mig­rants should “self-de­port,” Ry­an has said he would sup­port a path to cit­izen­ship for some of the 11 mil­lion im­mig­rants liv­ing in the coun­try il­leg­ally. He sup­por­ted a com­pre­hens­ive im­mig­ra­tion bill in the House as far back as 2005. Yet, un­like Sen. Marco Ru­bio, who openly cam­paigned for a bi­par­tis­an im­mig­ra­tion bill, Ry­an’s role has been more meas­ured and stealthy. Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans say Ry­an helped clear the way for mem­bers to try and ne­go­ti­ate a bi­par­tis­an House bill in 2013 and they note he was gauging in­terest. Still, they say he was not the face of the ef­fort, nor was he the only prom­in­ent Re­pub­lic­an or con­ser­vat­ive in­volved.

Raul Lab­rador, for ex­ample, a mem­ber of the Free­dom Caucus, had once been part of the group ne­go­ti­at­ing bi­par­tis­an im­mig­ra­tion re­form.

“Some Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans were meet­ing to try and knock something out; even Lab­rador was in that group for awhile,” said Rep. Raul Gri­jalva, a Demo­crat from Ari­zona. “I think the con­tri­bu­tion that Boehner and Ry­an made was that they didn’t im­pede it.”

Gri­jalva says Ry­an “wasn’t writ­ing the le­gis­la­tion.”

Rep. Ren­ee Ellmers, who has sup­por­ted more-mod­er­ate im­mig­ra­tion bills in the past, also said Ry­an’s role was hardly a star­ring one.

“I feel like maybe some people are reach­ing for a reas­on to doubt his cap­ab­il­it­ies,” Ellmers says.

Rep. Mick Mul­vaney, a mem­ber of the House Free­dom Caucus who worked closely with Ry­an in 2013 on im­mig­ra­tion, says that Ry­an’s role has been over­blown and mis­char­ac­ter­ized.

“What I think is get­ting lost in a lot of the shuffle is we were only ask­ing three ques­tions. The ques­tion we took when we were ac­cused of be­ing for am­nesty was to our mem­bers: ‘Do you want to do im­mig­ra­tion now, later, or ever?’” Mul­vaney says. “ That’s it. We were not whip­ping a spe­cif­ic bill for or against. We were simply try­ing to gauge the at­mo­sphere of the con­fer­ence on tak­ing up im­mig­ra­tion go­ing in­to an elec­tion cycle. So to me, the im­mig­ra­tion thing is a red her­ring. “

Gu­ti­er­rez says Ry­an clearly un­der­stood the need to ex­pand the Re­pub­lic­an Party’s base after his bid as vice pres­id­ent. Ry­an spoke along­side Gu­ti­er­rez at the City Club of Chica­go in April 2013, just months be­fore the Sen­ate passed its im­mig­ra­tion bill.

“Did Paul Ry­an play a role in try­ing to bring about a con­sensus? He did,”  Gu­ti­er­rez said. “He is for an im­mig­ra­tion sys­tem that al­lows a path­way to cit­izen­ship for people.”

But Ry­an’s as­sur­ances that he would not push for any­thing bey­ond maybe a bor­der or in­tern­al-se­cur­ity bill in the up­com­ing months speaks to both the tim­ing con­straints of this le­gis­lat­ive ses­sion as well as keen aware­ness that im­mig­ra­tion is a li­ab­il­ity for him. For mem­bers of the Free­dom Caucus, a primary chal­lenge from the Right—not frus­tra­tion from minor­ity voters back home—is of para­mount con­cern.

“I have a whole list of is­sues, and his po­s­i­tion on am­nesty is one of them,” says Rep. Wal­ter Jones, a con­ser­vat­ive from North Car­o­lina.

Rep. Steve King, a con­ser­vat­ive from Iowa, says he be­lieves Ry­an when he prom­ises not to tackle com­pre­hens­ive im­mig­ra­tion re­form this ses­sion of Con­gress, but he still is sup­port­ing Daniel Web­ster out of fear Ry­an may try and pur­sue im­mig­ra­tion re­form down the road.

“I think it does come in­to play. It comes in­to play with the next pres­id­ent,” King says. “If the next pres­id­ent is an open-bor­ders pres­id­ent and you have an open-bor­ders speak­er, it would be about im­possible to stop an am­nesty agenda at this point.”

What We're Following See More »
AFTER HE POSTED THREATENING PHOTO
Judge Orders Stone Gag Order
6 hours ago
THE LATEST
DATES TBD
New Election Ordered in NC-09
6 hours ago
THE DETAILS
Source:
AVOIDS SHUTDOWN WITH A FEW HOURS TO SPARE
Trump Signs Border Deal
6 days ago
THE LATEST

"President Trump signed a sweeping spending bill Friday afternoon, averting another partial government shutdown. The action came after Trump had declared a national emergency in a move designed to circumvent Congress and build additional barriers at the southern border, where he said the United States faces 'an invasion of our country.'"

Source:
REDIRECTS $8 BILLION
Trump Declares National Emergency
6 days ago
THE DETAILS

"President Donald Trump on Friday declared a state of emergency on the southern border and immediately direct $8 billion to construct or repair as many as 234 miles of a border barrier. The move — which is sure to invite vigorous legal challenges from activists and government officials — comes after Trump failed to get the $5.7 billion he was seeking from lawmakers. Instead, Trump agreed to sign a deal that included just $1.375 for border security."

Source:
COULD SOW DIVISION AMONG REPUBLICANS
House Will Condemn Emergency Declaration
6 days ago
THE DETAILS

"House Democrats are gearing up to pass a joint resolution disapproving of President Trump’s emergency declaration to build his U.S.-Mexico border wall, a move that will force Senate Republicans to vote on a contentious issue that divides their party. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Thursday evening in an interview with The Washington Post that the House would take up the resolution in the coming days or weeks. The measure is expected to easily clear the Democratic-led House, and because it would be privileged, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would be forced to put the resolution to a vote that he could lose."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login