An Immigration Reformer, CPAC Sponsor, Reflects On Its Suppression Of Immigration


March 09, 2010


[Also by Vincent
Chiarello:


Colin Powell`s Unreported Campaign For Racial Quotas At
State
]



Peter Brimelow writes:



Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily has just posted a powerful
column,



An Epitaph for CPAC
,
denouncing the Conservative Political Action
Conference`s Beltway management, specifically event
director Lisa De Pasquale, for what looks like
shockingly bad treatment of WND and Farah himself,
respectively a sponsor and a speaker of CPAC, and for
its obvious contempt for the conservative grassroots.
This reminds me of
my own reflections of CPAC last year
and is an encouraging sign that the Beltway Right is
losing control of its base. Farah reports he`s
organizing a counter-conference, entitled "
Taking
America Back
",
in September.


If a



Martian

had been brought to the



Conservative Political Action

Conference, held at the D.C`s Marriott Wardman Park
Hotel from February 17-20, what might he conclude?


Clearly, one sign of apparent success would be the
hotel`s completely filled garage spaces —so filled, in
fact, that cars were advised to use the parking
facilities of the nearby Washington Zoo (!).


Our Martian might also have noted the seemingly endless
flow of people, estimated at 10-11,000, a 20% increase
over the previous year.


But what if our Martian had been asked to measure
success in terms of honest discussions of



patriotic immigration reform?


Only one answer would be truthful: to put it kindly, the
issue apparently did not loom large in the minds of the



CPAC organizers.


In fact, that is true not only of the 2010 CPAC
Conference, the 37th annual gathering of the
conservative clan, but of all those I`ve attended over
the past several years. CPAC Conferences are simply not
useful settings for an honest airing of the issue of
immigration and that situation will not change in the
foreseeable future.


The stated purpose of this year`s CPAC, spelled out by
its organizers in a booklet with the title



"Saving Freedom",

was to build a setting in which conservative
organizations, especially



traditionalist

and



libertarian
,
find common ground. The planners invited experts to
speak about



Obama health care
,
and the confiscatory tax increases that will surely
follow; about job creation and growth; about the



rule of law

and our



constitutional foundations
;
about



the right to own firearms
;
about America`s vital role in the world etc. etc.


But the same cannot be said about



patriotic immigration reform.


In an attempt to change that, the



American Council for Immigration Reform

(ANCIR), of which I am a board member, was a co-sponsor
of this year`s CPAC. We were able to set up a booth,
along with scores of other organizations, (including,
for the first time, the



John Birch Society
)
in the hotel`s Exhibition Hall. We hoped this would
serve the patriotic immigration cause by getting out the
message that there is a nexus between the proclaimed
subject of the conference and porous US borders.


We were not quite alone. Nearby stood a booth with the
surprising title of




Catholics for a Moral Immigration Policy
,
which described itself as
"…an
organization of Christians who



believe

that an unfettered immigration policy (is) harmful,
dangerous and wrong"
—a
clear indication (I speak as a Catholic) that it had not
received the



imprimatur

of the



US Conference of Catholic Bishops.


Of the nearly 90 booths in the Exhibition Hall, only
these two specifically dealt with immigration.


My Martian`s suspicion that the CPAC organizers were
hostile to the subject of immigration reform would have
been further deepened by a review of the multiple main
and subsidiary sessions and speakers.


During the entire conference, only three subsidiary
sessions allowed even the slightest opportunity for the
registered guests to hear anything about the baleful
effects of immigration.


In the evening of February 18th,



Citizens United

presented a 90 minute documentary entitled,



Border War: The Battle Over Illegal Immigration
,
introduced by former congressman J.D. Hayworth, who is
challenging Senator John
"McAmnesty"
McCain in the GOP primary in Arizona.


On the morning of Saturday, February 19, i.e when the
conference was winding down, two sub-sessions were held
very close together. And one, controlled closely by the
Wall Street
Journal`s
John Fund, included



Linda Chavez

who, as usual,



warned the GOP

about "alienating
the country`s fastest growing demographic, Hispanics".


This paucity of conference discussions of immigration
would have puzzled our interplanetary visitor, but they
angered former Congressman



Tom Tancredo
.
In a rebuke of CPAC Board Member Grover Norquist,
Tancredo



wrote
:

"The best example
of how CPAC 2010 has failed the conservative movement is
CPAC`s attempt to redefine (
sabotage
would be a more accurate term) the potent issues of
illegal immigration and border security. Whereas


grass-roots conservatives

and millions of 912 patriots—along with 80 percent of
the American people—understand the need for border
security as a precondition for immigration reform, CPAC
board member


Grover Norquist
is busy launching a new project in support of the Obama
administration`s plan to grant another amnesty to 20
million illegal aliens. Neither


border control
nor
immigration
enforcement

was included as a topic for any of the CPAC general
sessions. "


The only sub-session that dealt specifically with the
issue of immigration`s impact on American society was
ANCIR`s. Entitled



"Immigration: The Defining Issue
for the
Republican Party

"
,
it brought together:



Robert Rector

of The Heritage Foundation;



Prof. James Gimpel

of the Univ. of Maryland.



Mark Krikorian

of the Center for Immigration Studies, and



Rep. Steve King,

(R-IA).


Prof. Gimpel, who has studied the political implications
of large-scale immigration, reiterated the results of
his research which show that, "as the immigrant
population has grown, Republican electoral prospects
have dimmed". When translated into specific terms, that
meant, "…an urban county that cast 49% of its vote for
the Republican candidate in 1980 could be expected to
drop to 43% in 2008".


Robert Rector`s forceful presentation focused on the
costs and fairness of granting amnesty and then
citizenship to those who have arrived illegally. Rector
emphasized that immigration will ultimately spell



the death knell of the GOP
:


"When you open borders and when you allow people to come
here legally in vast numbers, or illegally through
amnesty, what you are doing is giving them access to the
US



ballot box."


Rector repeated his point that immigration was helping
to bankrupt the US economy
:


"If you want to
cut costs, stop



importing poor people
into
the country!"


Mark Krikorian painted a similar picture, suggesting
that the Obama Administration has not rejected the idea
of amnesty despite the serious economic difficulties
that face America.


Rep. King pointed out an unexpected aspect of counting
illegal aliens in the US Census: in so doing, they give
incumbents an advantage in that since illegal aliens
cannot vote, so their presence requires fewer votes for
the office holder to retain his seat. King cited



Maxine Waters`s

seat in Watts District in Los Angeles, which is becoming
majority Hispanic, but contains



significant numbers of non-voting illegal aliens.


Further, King announced that he has introduced
legislation called the



New IDEA Act (HR 3580)
,
that would deny any federal tax advantages to businesses
that hire illegal aliens—a proposal that will not get a
fair hearing given the make-up of the current Congress.


After the meeting concluded, several attendees remained
to speak to the panelists. And, strange as it may seem
to VDARE.COM readers, I heard one of them, from
Illinois, ask for advice about dealing with the problem
of aliens drowning the medical and hospital systems in
that state.


What struck me was not this man`s creditable intention
to face the problem—but his apparent innocence of the



national scope of the problem

and of its direct connection to legal and illegal
immigration.


In fact, that was my impression of many attendees at
CPAC: very uninformed (why?) about how immigration,
especially its illegal variety, has deeply vitiated the
American way of life.


The early 20th century French writer and critic,



Paul Valery
,
once



wrote
:


"Politics is the art of preventing people from taking
part in affairs which properly concern them."


I believe it is not only fair, but accurate, to say that
this quip applies to the organizers of CPAC Conferences
with regard to the baleful impact of immigration on
American society.


And I assure you that my Martian guest couldn`t agree
more.



Vincent Chiarello

(
email
him) is a retired Foreign Service Officer whose tours
included U.S. embassies in Latin America and Europe. His
last, and most memorable, assignment was to the US
Embassy to The Holy See. Currently, he is on
the Board of the American National Council for
Immigration Reform of northern Virginia (
ANCIR).
For his VDARE.COM appearances, click



here
.