-By Warner Todd Huston
A recent round of posts between Gubernatorial candidate Dan Proft and Chicago Examiner website columnist Robert Moon of Macon County, Illinois shows the difficulty of trying to discuss immigration in Illinois today. Passions are high and it is hard to get past all the suspicion imbued in it all.
It all began with a segment of a Chicago radio broadcast in which Dan Proft addressed some of the more demagogic treatments of the immigration problem and echoed the worry made by many Republicans that the more wild-eyed treatments of the immigration problem is bound to force the GOP into permanent minority status due to the rising number of voters with Hispanic background.
Unfortunately, this snippet seems to do Proft’s full stance on immigration a disservice because it does not explain his larger views, some of which might tend to belie the initial impression. Mr. Moon construed Proft’s stance to be one of the “open borders” variety simply because the excerpt of Proft’s radio commentary appeared on the La Raza website (La Raza is a racist organization dedicated to taking back parts of the American south and all the south west for Mexico).
Moon mentioned that Proft has had “several pro-amnesty rants” featured on the La Raza website. I have tried to find these “rants” but have not located any so I cannot speak to this claim. If anyone has any links to these “rants” I’d like to see them. But if there are none (other than the one example), this single fact would tend to make Moon’s claim problematic.
In any case, the linked excerpt, Proft said the following:
Persons here illegally have by definition broken the law, as is Coulter’s essential point, but that is the beginning not the end of the analysis.
“It’s the law” is not a moral defense to laws that are immoral. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was “the law” and it was wrong. National origins quotas aimed at stemming the tide of southern and eastern European immigrants was “the law” on immigration until 1965 and it was wrong.
I have to say that this could be construed as pro-illegal immigrant. But a closer reading leaves room for doubt. After all, Proft did say that illegals have “by definition broken the law.” And his allusion to past “immoral laws” is not well enough defined here as to be obviously stating that any particular current law is similarly immoral.
In fact, Proft’s point seems to be more geared toward warning Republicans not to alienate people of Hispanic origin than to absolve illegals for their law breaking. Still, it is written in an altogether too cagy a style to make things explicit.
One thing seems plain, though. That is that Proft has a more nuanced view of the immigration issue than some may wish he had. He’s been known to sit in at various immigration forums hosted by immigrants “rights” groups, for instance — not a situation that makes anti-illegal immigration activists comfortable. If that wasn’t disconcerting enough for some, he has been an associate of one Joshua Hoyt who is executive director of the Illinois Coalition of Immigrant and Refugee Rights. The ICIRR has pushed for all sorts of handouts to be given to illegal aliens and has launched efforts to sign them up to vote. Hoyt is an extreme, leftist and completely dedicated to destroying American sovereignty.
On the other hand Proft has also said he’s against sanctuary cities (as he told participants at the URF Conservative candidates forum in September). He’s also said he is a supporter of the e-Verify program that would require employers to verify employment eligibility and that he’s against outright amnesty.
Proft is absolutely right when he says that the issue is easy to demagogue. It is far too easy to get into an “Us vs. Them” attitude. This vituperation does not engender dispassionate solutions, to be sure.
There are certain laws here that are insoluble, we must all agree. The border needs to be controlled, illegals cannot be allowed to break our laws and get easy work, and the many billions of dollars that governments across the country spend on these people is illicitly spent and must be stopped. As for myself, I would even favor denying schooling to children of illegals. Nor should such people get the vote. On the other hand, to take the immigration issue so far as to eliminate any immigration at all, or to assume that Hispanics “cannot” or even as a whole will not become assimilated is taking the issue too far. I have, for instance, observed many Mexican families that within a generation have become just as American as any, a situation seen by many immigrant communities throughout American history.
Now, I am not here saying that Proft is the right guy on immigration, necessarily. But what I am saying is that this issue is very difficult to discuss and that is too bad. We need common sense and dispassionate immigration policies, not demagogy.
In the interest of fairness, I asked Mr. Proft for a statement on this immigration imbroglio and he sent along this in reply:
My statements could no way be honestly construed as advocating “amnesty”, which I explicitly and repeatedly have said I oppose, but rather are properly understood as a simple description of our nation’s past in those instances where a wide range of ethnic groups were arbitrarily and improperly targeted, the particular ethnic group varying depending on the particular time period. This is not an opinion; it is an accounting of our nation’s past from which we should learn.
We can respect our heritage as a nation of immigrants, of America as an idea not simply a land mass, and still respect the rule of law. The two propositions are not mutually exclusive.
I have explicitly and repeatedly without fail expressed my opposition to extending benefits reserved for American citizens or persons otherwise here legally to persons not here legally. I have explicitly and repeatedly expressed my opposition to sanctuary city designations. I have explicitly and repeatedly expressed my support for initiatives like e-verify so that employers can check whether prospective employees are legally able to work in this country.
The missives you have received are little more than a feeble attempt to conjure up controversy where none exists to the benefit of one of my political opponents: Adam A. To borrow a word, it is a “transparent” attempt to orchestrate support for one of my opponents by one or more of his flunkies because support will not otherwise come to him on the basis of his merits. And since certain misguided and incredibly naive souls cannot win on the merits they have resorted to desperate distortions of my views and outright lies about my policy positions and professional background.
At least one tea party person–one Robert Moon that is–has quickly acclimated himself to the venal world of Illinois politics where persons make allegations without facts in the hopes that they’re never called to account. And this is after I did an interview with Mr. Moon just last week and answered all of the question he asked. He never raised any of the questions which he wrote about despite having the opportunity to do so. It is clear he was simply waiting to unfurl his hatchet piece rather than honestly attempting to gather information and ascertain the truth.
My campaign is about calling people to account; about explaining to the folks who play by the rules in Illinois the petty scams that are run on them; and about taking the fight to the political fixers–be they Democrats, Republicans or henchmen for one of my primary opponents. That is what I have done again in this instance.
Regards,
Dan Proft
Well, that leaves no doubt as to how Mr. Proft feels about certain personages, for sure.
As to his stated positions on immigration, they are solid. As to his actual policy that might result should he ever get the power, I cannot say for sure. His many associations — with Mr. Hoyt, for one — cause me much concern.
However, I have always been one to offer my platform here to those with whom I at least agree with that “80 percent of the time” (forgive my paraphrase of Ronald Reagan).
In the end, whether this issue is but an attempt to “conjure up controversy” as Mr. Proft contends, or whether his detractors are right and his immigration stance is suspect, my main point stands. We need to have a more dispassionate and logical discussion of our immigration problems. The failing economy has given us a small respite from the issue as many from south of the border are “self deporting” because they cannot find work, but the issue has NOT been solved.
It NEEDS to be solved.
____________
“The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it.”
–Samuel Johnson
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, StoptheACLU.com, TheRealityCheck.org, RedState.com, Human Events Magazine, AmericanDailyReview.com, and the New Media Journal, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events and is currently the co-host of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Conservatism” heard on BlogTalkRadio. Warner is also the editor of the Cook County Page for RedCounty.com.
He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions : EMAIL Warner Todd Huston
Fair Use: This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.