2012 Texas GOP Convention Report, Part 2

The Platform

I am sure that there are other areas of disagreement about the Texas Republican Platform, but it seemed like the only plank people wanted to argue about was the one on Immigration.  The new plank in its entirety read:

The Texas Solution – Because of decades-long failure of the federal government to secure our borders and address the immigration issue, there are now upwards of 11 million undocumented individuals in the United States today, each of whom entered and remain here under different circumstances.  Mass deportation of these individuals would neither be equitable nor practical; while blanket amnesty, as occurred with the Simpson-Mazzoli Act of 1986, would only encourage future violations of the law.  We seek common ground to develop and advance a conservative, market- and law-based approach to our nation’s immigration issues by following these principles:

1. Secure Our Borders – The U.S. Border must be secured immediately!  We demand the application of effective, practical and reasonable measures to secure our borders and to bring safety and security for all Americans along the border and throughout the nation.

2. Modernize the United States Social Security Card – We support the improvement of our 1936 Social Security card to use contemporary anti-counterfeit technology. The social security card will not be considered a National ID card for U.S. citizens.

3. Birthright Citizenship – We call on the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of the United States to clarify Section 1 of the 14th amendment to limit citizenship by birth to those born to a citizen of the United States with no exceptions.

4. Create an Effective and Efficient Temporary Worker Program – A national Temporary Worker Program should be implemented to bring skilled and unskilled workers into the United States for temporary periods of time when no U.S. workers are currently available.  The program should also require:

• Self-funding through participation fees and fines;
• Applicants must pass a full criminal background check;
• Applicants with prior immigration violations would only qualify for the program if they paid the appropriate fines;
• Applicants and/or Employers must prove that they can afford and/or secure private health insurance;
• Applicants must waive any and all rights to apply for financial assistance from any public entitlement programs;
• Applicant must show a proficiency in the English language and complete an American civic class;
• Temporary Workers would only be able to work for employers that deduct and match payroll taxes;
• All participants would be issued an individual Temporary-Worker Biometric Identification Card that tracks all address changes and both civil and criminal court appearances as a defendant.

This approach closely follows the suggestions of Newt Gingrich this year and Mike Huckabee four years ago.  It is within the mainstream of Republican thought and in no way paves the way for Amnesty now or in the future for those who have entered our nation illegally.

A softened approach to those who are already here (and who are being as productive as they can be in the shadow economy that is necessary for their survival) coupled with a commitment to securing the border is the most rational approach going forward.  I commend the Platform Committee and the Delegates who approved the new language overwhelmingly.

There are those who will claim that this language was slipped through because we didn't get to the Platform on the floor until late into the evening on Friday.  However, a reasonable analysis should lead to the conclusion that the vast majority of those opposed to the new plank would have been especially motivated to return for the 9:00 p.m. session.  Even so, the Texas Solution was approved by roughly a 2 to 1 margin of those present and voting.  I believe that if the entire delegation had been present, the ratio would have been closer to 3 or 4 to 1 in favor.

Maybe, just maybe, the Republican Party can stop antagonizing hispanic voters.  If we don't, the future of the Party in Texas will begin to look bleaker and bleaker.

Yet Another Reason I Like Mike (Huckabee)

At the California GOP debate at the Ronald Reagan Library, the last question was asked of all 4 participants. "Would Ronald Reagan endorse you for President?" Governor Huckabee was fortunate to get the final word of the evening, and this is what he said:

I think it would be incredibly presumptuous and even arrogant for me to try to suggest what Ronald Reagan would do, that he would endorse any of us against the others.

Let me just say this, I'm not going to pretend he would endorse me. I wish he would. I would love that, but I endorse him, and I'm going to tell you why.

It wasn't just his specific policies, but Ronald Reagan was something more than just a policy wonk. He was a man who loved this country, and he inspired this country to believe in itself again.

What made Ronald Reagan a great president was not just the intricacies of his policies, though they were good policies. It was that he loved America and saw it as a good nation and a great nation because of the greatness of its people.

And if we can recapture that, that's when we recapture the Reagan spirit. It's that spirit that has a can-do attitude about America's futures and that makes us love our country whether we're Democrats or Republicans. And that's what I believe Ronald Reagan did -- he brought this country back together and made us believe in ourselves.

And whether he believes in us, I hope we still believe in those things which made him a great leader and a great American.

Those, my friends, are the words of a true Statesman.

Republicans and Limited Government

To hear some Republican establishment types, the raison d'etre of the G.O.P. is to reduce the size of the Federal Government. This has been the basis for some of the criticism of Mike Huckabee in the Presidential race. The truth is that the only candidate with any credibility on this issue is Ron Paul.

And just how many of those establishment types are supporting Ron Paul?

Exactly!

So, the next time you hear this attack aimed at Huckabee, you can ignore it because you know it's insincere.

Right Wing Nation

I used to be able to post comments at Right Wing Nation with no problem, but apparently I committed the mortal sin of defending Mike Huckabee over there, so now I'm on "administrator must approve" status.

So much for the free exchange of ideas.

The offending comment was made on this post. After rightwingprof's response, I pointed out that his calling Huckabee a "a soft on crime socialist who spits in the faces of crime victims" is no different from those who attack by calling John McCain, MCSHAMNESTYMCCAIN! And that was the type of attack that he was condemning in the original post.

People don't like it when their hypocrisy is exposed.

UPDATE: Now, he's calling me an amoral idiot. Yup, really bringing the level of discourse up over there. Really avoiding the ideological nonsense he was condemning.

Hello kettle, this is the pot . . .

Fracture

Just wondering:

Why is Mike Huckabee accused of trying to fracture the so-called Republican coalition, but Giuliani, Romney, & McCain aren't?

Social Conservatives' values are ignored by Giuliani, belittled by McCain, and pandered to by Romney.

When less than desirable candidates from a social conservative perspective are nominated (Bush '92 & Dole '96 spring immediately to mind), values voters are told that we have an obligation to support the Republican Party because the Democrats are much worse. That may be true, but it's no less fracturing than Huckabee would be in asking fiscal conservatives to come along for the ride this year. In fact, I believe that fiscal conservatives have far less to fear from Huckabee than social conservatives would have to fear from Rudy, John, or Mitt.

After all, Huckabee is the only candidate proposing to completely do away with Corporate Income Taxes.

And personal income taxes, and estate taxes, gift taxes, social security taxes, medicare taxes, self-employment taxes, and capital gains taxes.

Electability

My brother commented earlier:

on electability, see my blog posts where i analyze voter trends back into the 80s, and conclude that Huckabee would get 50.4% of the vote, in a pure head-to-head race against an undetermined Democrat.

http://huck-the-system.blogspot.com/2007/11/pew-political-typologies.html

http://huck-the-system.blogspot.com/2007/12/typologies-potus-vote-patterns.html

Let me be clear, I'm not conceding the prevailing opinion that Huckabee is less electable than, say Giuliani. In fact, Rasmussen's latest Head-to-heads show Huckabee doing better against Clinton than anyone other than McCain.

Of course, National polls are meaningless. Not just now, but always in Presidential Politics. Thanks to the Electoral College system, the Presidential election is really a series of 50 State races rather than a national race. It's nice to garner the Majority (or even a plurality as Bill Clinton demonstrated), but it's not necessary, as George W. Bush proved in 2000.

However, perhaps even more telling for Huckabee, his Favorable rating is higher than all the Republican candidates other than McCain, and his negatives are the lowest of the main Republican contenders. Duncan Hunter is lower in unfavorables, but I'm certain that's because nobody knows who he is. Given his low recognition, his Unfavorable rating is actually pretty high.

If Huckabee can win the Republican Nomination, his chance of winning in November 2008 is as good as any other Republican's, and better than some.

Vote For, Not Against

One of the main reasons I finally decided to support Mike Huckabee for President in 2008 is that I like the prospect of voting for somebody rather than against someone else. In 2004, I noted to anyone who would listen that John Kerry wouldn't beat Bush because it is too tough to rally people long-term in voting against somebody. The Democrats kept talking about how much they hated Bush, and they tried to turn out the vote with an anti-Bush message rather than a pro-Kerry one.

I feared that 2008 would be a mirror image. Only this time, it would be Republicans trying to GOTV with appeals to the scariness of Hillary Clinton (and make no mistake about it, she is plenty scary). This strategy is a loser. It's also why I never jumped on the electability bandwagon. In the Republican race so far, "electability" has most often been defined as "somebody who can beat Hillary." Yes, several people would be inspired to come out to vote against Hillary, but firming up that support is much easier if the Republican is someone the people want to vote for.

Mike Huckabee is the kind of candidate that many people will want to vote for, even if they don't agree with him on every issue. I've only voted "against" somebody once in my life. That was in 1996. I wasn't particularly thrilled with Bob Dole, but I knew he was preferable to Bill Clinton.

I'm excited to have a candidate I can vote for in 2008.

No Stranger to Dark Horses

My "late to the party" support of Mike Huckabee for President in 2008 isn't the first time I've latched onto a so-called Dark Horse Candidate. In 1996, I made my first ever political contribution to Alan Keyes. I even drove from Waco to Denton to hear him speak in person. Maybe it was that Quixotic support that cause me to hold back so long on Huckabee. I didn't want to pick a candidate with absolutely no shot at getting the nomination. Now, as I examine the polls, I think there's good reason to think that this race has become Huckabee's to lose.

First, the attacks aren't sticking.  Reagan was called the Teflon President.  Huckabee may very well be 2008's Teflon Candidate.

Second, Fred Thompson has to drop out sooner or later.  I'd prefer it be before South Carolina, but even if he waits until after South Carolina, as long as he exits before February 5th, this can only help Huckabee.  There's no way to know for sure, but once Thompson drops out, the most logical place for his supporters to go is to Huckabee.  Except, if McCain is still in the race, Thompson might endorse McCain.

Third, except for Thompson, there's really no other viable choice for Christian Republicans.  I'm not knocking my friends who have chosen for various reasons to support Giuliani, but I just don't buy the "Rudy is the only one who can beat Hillary" argument.  Duncan Hunter may be a fine man and would likely be a good President, but barring some sort of miracle, he's dead.  Maybe he'll realize it after Iowa and New Hampshire.

Huck the System

That's the title of my brother's pro-Mike Huckabee blog. I don't agree with former Governor Huckabee on 100% of the issues, but he's the closest I'm gonna get this year in any reasonably viable candidate. I won't have to hold my nose to vote for him like I would if most of the other Republican candidates got the nomination.

The Rest of the Republican Field and all the Democrats Tremble in Fear

Chuck Norris Endorses Mike Huckabee for President