G.I. is AWOL on SB 1070

by David Safier

Democratic Diva commented that the Goldwater Institute has been strangely silent about the new anti-immigrant law. She includes G.I. in a list with the Chamber of Commerce and the Tea Partiers, both of whom are usually eager to register their opinions at a moment's notice but seem to have, um, missed all the ruckus over SB 1070.

But, as usual, I want to focus on G.I.

I believe G.I.'s silence is cowardice, pure and simple. Philosophically, the Institute dislikes SB 1070, but this 800 pound gorilla is too dangerous for G.I. to wrestle with, so it hopes it can hide behind the sofa until the issue blows over.

G.I. has a libertarian bent. Libertarians don't like the idea of national IDs, and they don't like slippery slopes leading in that direction. The "Show your papers!" part of SB 1070 is reason enough for G.I. to oppose SB 1070.

Because of its libertarian bent, G.I. tends to be against strict anti-immigration laws in general. ID or no ID, SB 1070 is moving in a direction contrary to G.I.'s general philosophy.

The last time G.I. chimed in on the immigration issue I could find was in 2007 during the battles over comprehensive immigration reform. Remember the Kennedy/McCain bill, back when McCain had a shred of his conscience still intact?

The piece was titled, GOP runs a big risk of losing Hispanics, by Clint Bolick. It was a pragmatic plea for Republicans to get behind the reform bill to hold onto Hispanic voters.

Anti-immigration conservatives are subjecting U.S. Sens. Jon Kyl and John McCain to blistering attacks over their pivotal role in the comprehensive immigration bill currently on life support in Congress. But if they get their way and the bill dies, so too may Republican electoral prospects for the foreseeable future.

[snip]

The best way to reverse the trend is to get the immigration issue behind us as quickly as possible. Hispanic Americans are conservative on most social issues, including immigration, making them a natural constituency, or at least open to voting, for Republicans. But what Hispanics saw in Republicans who made the 2006 elections a referendum on deporting illegal immigrants was a face of hostility.

[snip]

The immigration bill is far from perfect, but it is the best that those who support strict enforcement possibly can hope for in this or any Congress in the foreseeable future. Notably, according to a New York Times poll, the principles reflected in the bill are supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans. The alternative is to allow the issue to fester, which is a recipe not only for continued societal division, but for an ever-shrinking share of the vote for Republicans.

That was G.I.'s position 3 years ago, supporting the comprehensive immigration bill, which it kind of liked anyway, and bolstering its argument with a call for political pragmatism.

This time, G.I. is terrified of what will happen if it goes against every R legislator and pol in the state. So, like most bullies, the Goldwater Institute runs away at the sign of
trouble, cowering behind the sofa hoping no one finds it until this thing blows over.

Boo! I see you! So does Democratic Diva!

I wonder if any conservative bloggers or pols will ask the Goldwater Institute to show some guts and take a principled stand on an issue that might cost it dearly with its supporters, both political and financial.