Immigration Battle Lines [SCOTT WALTER] Thanks for tuning in I'm Scott Walter [MIKE WATSON] and I'm Michael Watson [SCOTT WALTER] In this episode, we go behind the scenes of one of the most divisive issues in modern politics, immigration. This is the influence watch podcast. Last week we discussed the current debates over a federal government spending bill and speculated that if a government shutdown occurred, it would be because of wrangling over immigration more than the budget. Sure enough, we could be headed for that very scenario as we sit here congressional Democrats are battling the Trump administration over what to do about deferred action for childhood arrivals or DACA an Obama administration policy that shielded certain illegal aliens from deportation by executive Fiat. The Trump administration rescinded daca though a federal court order has temporarily blocked the rescission, but it has expressed a willingness to formally legalize the daca recipients in exchange for concessions from congressional Democrats on border security and on reforms that will diminish family-based chain migration, but after a heated bipartisan meeting with senators Lindsey Graham, Tom Cotton, David Perdue and Dick Durbin which resulted in the president reportedly using a scatological phrase to describe certain developing countries, prospects for a deal look grim leaving congressional Republicans to regroup and prepare for another short term government funding effort. Well, Mike let's start with just a touch of background on DACA where did it come from? [MIKE WATSON] So in 2012, in advance of his re-election President Obama issued an executive action, an executive order that dictated that illegal immigrants who had arrived in the United States before their 16th birthday and before 2007, and met certain other requirements about education and work education and work which applied for legal protection would receive legal protection and not be able to be deported. They would also be able to work legally in the United States [SCOTT WALTER] Now there was a dispute about whether President Obama had this Authority correct? [MIKE WATSON] Yes, the congressional Republicans said that he didnÕt, Democrats have the majority so it was heart you know there was no real way to adjudicate it the Trump administration after president Trump got elected the Trump administration looked at it, and they said we don't have the authority and that's why we are now in the situation that we are in. [SCOTT WALTER] Of course, as I recall President Obama for some years had told his own supporters the same thing that a President lacks this Authority. [MIKE WATSON] Right, for a few years under pressure from the immigration expansionist Left President Obama had said that he could not unilaterally reform immigration he needed a law in Congress, once it became clear that he was not going to get a law from Congress that would satisfy him he acted in this manner [SCOTT WALTER] Now we just mentioned a moment ago that current the current legal status is that a federal judge has said that Trump lacks the authority to do what he has just done where does that stand? [MIKE WATSON] That has been appealed I believe the Department of Justice appealed it directly to the Supreme Court rather than going to the ninth circus and the legal watchers although we can never know and never discern the precise mental state of Anthony Kennedy at any given time. The suspicion is that the Supreme Court will laugh the district court that has stopped the rescission they will simply laugh them out of court and hold that yes the president can issue an executive order reversing an executive order [SCOTT WALTER] And especially on the question of immigration where executive power has always been understood to be rather broad? [MIKE WATSON] Yes, executive power in we can argue whether this is whether this is a good thing or a bad thing I am a congressional supremacist and believe it's a bad thing. But the way Congress has given over its much of its authority to create a uniform rule of naturalization as the Constitution says has given it to the executive discretion allowing the executive to do lots of things whether or not Congress wants the executive to do it. [SCOTT WALTER] Now, the Obama our sorry the Trump administration is fighting this has in the courts as you said they took its all the way up to Supreme Court immediately but on the other hand, they have signaled some willingness to deal in this area is that right? [MIKE WATSON] Yes, the Trump administration and President Trump himself have said that you know they really don't want to to take away the status that was given to the relatively young illegal immigrants who were given status by President Obama's executive Fiat. So they have said all right you know Democrats we agree that this population should be given legal status and should probably be given a path I don't know where they stand on a pathway to citizenship although pathway to citizenship would probably come out of any reasonably predictable negotiation so the Trump administration said fine I'll give you that and but if we're gonna do that I mean I was elect you know President Trump says I was elected on a promise to build wall, establish border security, reform immigration any more restriction is direction you have to give me something and that's where we everything is kind of stalled. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes, and of course this made the biggest headlines because of a well what in the press release language is a full and frank discussion among the President, and some Senate leaders is that correct? [MIKE WATSON] A full and frank discussion, yeah so the Senate negotiators Republican from South Carolina relatively liberal on immigration Lindsey Graham and number two Senate Democrat dick Durbin of Illinois we're going to present there agree their agreement that they had made with some other centrist Republican senators and Democrats and the president called in two of the leading restrictionists of Arkansas and David Perdue of Georgia who have authored an immigration restriction assimilation proposal that we'll get to later in our discussion. And they had a frank exchange of that resulted in the president using a colorful phrase to describeÑit is reported that he used it to describe specifically Haiti and Africa and possibly other less well-off countries and he compared them to Norway and depending on who you believe also possibly East Asia--this needless to say has sent the Democrats into a spiraling tizzy the Republican and Perdue deny that he said it implausibly and Senator Graham although not explicitly confirming that President Trump said what he said and that Graham actually called him out for having said a particularly nasty thing. Graham all but confirmed it with a nonconfirmation confirmation. [SCOTT WALTER] I can't resist a slight digression on on Norway a couple of points on that would be that rich Lowry the editor of National Review has theorized that one reason the president happened to toss out the name Norway was because he so recently had met with Norwegian officials and they'd filled him with the wonders of Norway. Personally I'm a bit skeptical Scandinavian countries given their strong tendency to secularism and socialism, but it is an even funnier part of this which I've not seen anybody make the point is the most famous and highest-ranking White House official of Norwegian background in recent decades was Karl Rove the so-called architect of George W/ Bush's success. Now Karl but with whom I overlapped a bit in the White House himself was a vigorous Pro-immigration arguer, and he loved to quote hundred-year-old newspaper stories magazine articles about how horrible those Norwegian immigrants are in their ghettos and the bad way they live. [MIKE WATSON] And that's been one of the broader responses to what the president said. You know my ancestors came from, many of them came from Ireland when my ancestors would have come over we haven't done the genealogy, I am not familiar with the precise genealogy, so I don't know exactly when they came over, but we can presume it was the middle of the nineteenth century Ireland was not a nice place to live you might say they were not governing themselves well [SCOTT WALTER] Although I believe they would say the English deserve a lot of blame [MIKE WATSON] Yeah the English were mal-governing the island we would say and much as parts of the Caribbean in Africa or mal-governed by their governments today the result was people wanted to go somewhere where they could govern themselves and have Economic Opportunity, and that's you know now obviously it's a different time now, the economy's different getting at getting your first job on the ladder isn't as easy as you know signing on with the foreman and working you know your 16-hour shift at the mill but and of course when when the Irish came over there wasn't also a welfare state but the principle that people from lousy places can go on to become not only contributing members of society but also profoundly contributing members of society I think is important to point is important to indicate, and I think the certainly the way it was reported it seemed like that had escaped President Trump [SCOTT WALTER] Yes, no I guess you could you could give an example maybe on on either side of this on the one hand Europe currently has high levels of immigration in many places from very messed up countries they're very poorly governed countries and there are serious problems with that like the rape capital of Europe being in Sweden for instance right next of Norway on the other hand there would I suppose you could you could give the example of the Chinese now that the Chinese nation has not been well governed arguably first met quite a few centuries on the other hand it is very it's a very famous example that off so-called offshore Chinese when they are off mainland China and elsewhere in Asia or Los Angeles or whatnot are extraordinarily successful despite having come from a country that has not had a very American Way of life in its government let us say for a very long time. [MIKE WATSON] Right, you see that you know to choose a country indirectly implicated by the president one of the highest education levels for immigrants to the United States are from Nigeria which is a very large country in West Africa why is that well the people who have the wherewithal the people who have the means to come over from there tend to be at least middle-income reasonably well-off reasonably well-educated and certainly that and then if you can qualify for our merit immigration system which is very hard. Then you are likely to be very well educated and potentially very well-off. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes, well let's pop back for a second to the politics of this politics as Lincoln said always depends on public opinion and what is the apparent public view on DACA? [MIKE WATSON] Every time I bring up an issue I bring up issue polling one of my core beliefs about politics is that issue polling is mostly garbage but it's all we got and the issue polling here depending on the pollster is reasonably consistent so I think it gives us, a reasonable view on where the public seems to stand or at least where its inclined and its inclined strongly in favor of of a at least a rationalization of status and probably a majority in favor of a path to citizenship some of the polls that have come out in recent weeks I think CBS had it at 70 percent favor either legal status or a path to citizenship Quinnipiac had it at 79. [SCOTT WALTER] Now of course with the polling like that as you as you point out it often is is pretty shaky and one of the greatest pitfalls I think of asking people polls that ask the questions on the order of do you favor policy X or not the single greatest failing of that is that they don't ask the critical follow-up question and do you care? [MIKE WATSON] A great example of a completely different issue where that's where that's the thing is the question of gun background checks supposedly you know the Mike Bloomberg comes out and says you know ninety percent of Americans favor gun background checks, yeah but the ten percent who care all hate it. Now do I think do I think just putting on my rank pundit Rhee hat that a similar dynamic is pertaining here no I think there is a very strong advocacy in favor largely from communities that have large numbers of DACA recipients do I think there is a staunchly opposed minority? Yeah sure. Do I think it's very large? No. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes well that well that we'll see how that works in the in how all this plays out and now you mentioned a little bit ago about Trump making the argument look I want an election where one of my single biggest issues was saying we need to build a wall in order to have stronger border security is there much willingness among the Democrats to fund anything that the president could call a wall? [MIKE WATSON] Not to enough that he could actually build something and cut a ribbon and say look at my wall. The bill the proposal that was presented in the meeting that led to the scatological phrase being used I think had a couple billion, John Kelly Trump's chief of staff says he wants 20 the Democrats because of their based politics do not want anything that can be called a wall now this morning's tweets laid aside because who knows what those are worth over the last few months basically since he got elected you know Trump has stepped back from his insistence that it be you know a solid wall all the way across the continent. We have in an interview with Sean Hannity back in December of I think 2016 he said you know we have vicious rivers obviously he can't build a wall in the middle of the Rio Grande the so a if you think of the wall as sort of a symbol of border security that would be a physical barrier in some places and you know extra border agents and Swift boats and all that and some other places. You know there is some willingness to give some but not very much and not enough that Trump can say I've won you know I've won a concession for my side [SCOTT WALTER] Plus of course that's not the only is that's not the only factor in having illegal aliens in America there's also the obviously the issue of people who come in legally but then do not leave when they were legally required to leave and overstay their visas, and that has also been a factor. [MIKE WATSON] It has been a big issue, you know it brings up the Irish again that a lot of people come over on temporary work visas and then not the Irish but other places on refugee and other temporary statuses you know they establish a life here they get a job and then there are six months, or they're eight months or their couple years runs out, and then they don't leave. [SCOTT WALTER] And depending the estimates say that maybe up to half of the annual illegal immigrant inflow which is lower than it has been in past years maybe from people who overstay legal status now some of them you know they mess up for administrative reasons and then they go home others are actually trying to stay yeah the so in a overarching policy way of looking this would be that one side stresses what they would call family unit reunification and what their critics would call chain migration where one family member can bring multiple members over. [MIKE WATSON] Yeah, let me a let me kind of explain how the chain through how the theoretical chain would work. You admit an immigrant for you know let's say that they're admitted maybe on an investor visa an immigrant investor visa or their work sponsored immigrant that immigrant can then brick can then use a meet once that immigrant becomes a US citizen and they can bring over on as a permanent resident but with time lags and a couple of asterisks their immediate family but let's assume that they get naturalized then they bring over their immediate family as permanent residents, they can also sponsor family preference, which is for siblings I believe its siblings parents adults children. And on family preference with some asterisks and a fairly substantial time lag our immigrant could bring over his brother and then once his brotherÑyou know five-hundred five to seven years down the road net got his US citizenship he could then bring over his familyÑand so immigration critics of immigration critics say that that creates a theoretically endless string theory, and endless chain of new immigrants. There are several asterisks that I think it's fair to point out one obviously not every immigrant is going to necessary not every immigrant is necessarily going to sponsor their siblings and parents and so forth coming over the there are substantial time lags in between when you pin petition you can ask the government please put these people in in my family preference line in line for immigration and when they would qualify for when they actually would end up qualifying for a green card or and then you know when when you come over for a green card that's your permanent residency I believe it's five years down the road you can then apply for citizenship assuming you meet the requirements. So this is a many year process and a human lifespan puts put some boundaries on the on the length of a chain that you could create. [SCOTT WALTER] Of course, on the on the flip side the folks on the other side of the argument including it presumably the president would say other countries routinely screen the immigrants that they permit for instance our Canadian neighbors to the north not known particularly for their own vicious racism but they have a much more merit-based system do they not for a lot. Yes, it means in, and if one wanted to interpret the president's remarks charitably, it would be why shouldn't we be getting the creme de la creme right of any countries the Nigerian cousin here to finish his doctorate in microbiology. [MIKE WATSON] Right, and then the Nigerian finished once he finishes his doctorate in mic of microbiology can then go work for Pfizer and become a U.S. citizen the. So the other Anglo-sphere democracies the United Kingdom although they get a big asterisk because of the EU but that's gonna go away which is another asterisk Canada and Australia have what's called a points-based system, and this is what was proposed in that raise act that senators Cotton and Perdue introduced that I said we would get back to. The idea behind a points-based system is that the receiving country that would be the United States looks at the people petitioning to immigrate and looks at their economic qualifications their likely social contribution, their age because age determines whether you're going how long you're going to be a productive worker paying Social Security tax versus how long you were going to be collecting Social Security payouts, and then you know according to a to whatever schedule of points is issued, those with a sufficient number of points they have advanced degree is they speak the receiving country's language they have only a spouse they have you know depend again it depends on the precise schedule that's issued. Once you have enough points then you are qualified to enter and receive permanent residency and ultimately citizenship [SCOTT WALTER] Well now just to say in passing here that of course there's also the issue of what the total inflow should be and there's great controversy over that but let's move on to our own specialty which is the influencing groups in this debate there's no it's not really just a two-sided debate it's really a three isnÕt it? [MIKE WATSON] It's at least a three you could even say three and a half who would the first group be so the first group or first and a half group would be the restriction aside and kind of a larger faction at least you know in theory are the many of the more national conservative mainstream entities. Heritage Foundation a National Review magazine are probably the two that are most are most prominent in this debate but then you also have these the sidecar of single-issue immigration restrictionist groups. Center for Immigration Studies which does which does research on immigration levels numbers USA which does advocacy and grassroots mobilization. The Federation for American immigration reform which also does advocacy and Californians for population stabilization which is a state-level immigration restrictionist advocacy group in California. [SCOTT WALTER] And of course, that's intriguing because one doesn't typically think of environmentalists getting lumped in with groups considered conservative. [MIKE WATSON] Yeah population stabilization isn't exactly in the Heritage Foundation's mission statement is it and there's a reason for that for those groups being in that kind of half faction. All of these Singlish of these four single-issue groups and a few and a few others it's not an exhaustive list are backed by a fanatically Pro population control minority faction of environmentalists. The largest funder is a group called the Colcum Foundation which is one of the Scaife family philanthropies but not one of the ideologically conservative scape family philanthropies it's the philanthropy of Cornelius Scaife May who was a follower of an idealized Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. Colcum itself has given a six-figure grant to Planned Parenthood of western Pennsylvania in addition to backing environmentalist groups like the Center for coalfield justice the community environment Legal Defense Fund and then these immigration restriction groups also get money from the Whedon Foundation which is an environmentalist group that has backed the Natural Resources Defense Council, has funded the pro-abortion dissident nominally Catholic group Catholics for Choice and even the militant atheist group Freedom From Religion Foundation. [SCOTT WALTER] So you could say there these are the folks who are opposed to immigrants because they're opposed to human beings. [MIKE WATSON] They're opposed this because these funding organizations are opposed to people. In fact, it was according to Los Angeles Times it was said about Scaife May, the founder of Colcum Foundation, that she liked animals more than people and that was a button that was apparently a friendly acquaintance according to the LA Times report. [SCOTT WALTER] Well, that's a line out of the Wall Street movie as I recall with Michael Douglas but referring to my own ethnic group that why they love animals, they hate people he tells Charlie Sheen. Now the next faction in the broader debate then would be the more business and libertarian-ish sorts and what can you tell us about them? [MIKE WATSON] So the business the business community their sort of Chamber of Commerce Business Roundtable American Farm Bureau Federation generally favored expanded immigration they're like a large labor force they like a ready supply of workers they also favor legalization of most of the current illegal immigrant population it makes things administratively easy. They also get support from ideological libertarian groups Mercatus Center, Cato Institute, philanthropist Charles and David Koch and the libertarians the philosophical ground is that a border puts an imposition on people's right to work and move about as they chose. You know I am I am allowed as a citizen of the District of Columbia to live and work in Virginia, but I am not allowed to live and work in Lisbon Portugal. [SCOTT WALTER] And that offends them the libertarians [MIKE WATSON] It offends the libertarians and civility of the people. They see it is an ultimately arbitrary restriction on the individual. And then we also have the sort of the tech billionaire crowd who sponsor a group called forward.us which is stylized capital FWD.us that advocates mostly for higher skilled immigration but also for coalition management purposes for a generally expansionist policy. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes, the Silicon Valley likes a particular type of visa for high tech employees that they can that they can bring over from places like India well and then the third faction would be the left and who are the leaders there? [MIKE WATSON] They're exactly who you think they would be; the big left-wing foundations open society which is Soros's principle principle funding vehicle Ford Foundation the one of the largest foundations in the country Carnegie Corporation of New York the Susan Thompson Buffett foundation which has worn one of Warren Buffett's many philanthropic vehicles TIDES foundation list kind of goes on they like the weird environmentalists on the restriction aside also fund a bunch of single issue nonprofit policy groups the migration policy institute which is their research their Research Center national immigration forum which is their advocacy group National Immigration Law Center which does litigation and the American Immigration Council which also does policy research and advocacy. [SCOTT WALTER] But that's not the only part of the left that's involved in these fights, is it? [MIKE WATSON] No, you have the general multi-issue advocacy groups like the Clinton World think tank Center for American Progress we'll get back to them in a moment and also labor. The SEIU is a funder of a cup of some of those single-issue immigration groups NEA and unite here have funded the National Immigration Law Center you know labor kind of like business sees the opportunity you know where's business sees the opportunity for more workers labor sees the opportunity for more members. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes although I suspect that if you polled the membership of the National Education Association many of whose members have to deal with school systems struggling mightily and the influx of immigrationÉ [MIKE WATSON] But then you get into coalition management which will get toÉ [SCOTT WALTER] Well now thanks for laying out the sort of the three or three and a half parts of this jigsaw puzzle of influence obviously when groups are jockeying for influence and trying to persuade the public one of their favorite weapons is to talk about people who disagree with those motives and this is a particularly rich field for that in this issue area. So why don't we start withÉ [MIKE WATSON] Part of why this is such a divisive issue is because everybody just about everybody thinks everybody else is behaving dishonestly, so the left-wing ideologues just assume anybody on the restriction of sight is racist or white supremacist or you know anti-latino or whatever the word of the day is, you know I mean The Nation back in I think it was June of 2017 published a piece that was titled how to fight Trump's racist immigration policies we don't even need to argue that there that they are racist. Now some of the behavior of some of the restriction is Trump's comment that juxtaposed the world against Africa as a supply, as a source of potential immigrants does not help dispel that notion. Whether you believe that was his intention or not it doesn't look good. [SCOTT WALTER] And then there's the business community? [MIKE WATSON] Now the business community has to play in it has to play a lot nicer because they also want things like tax cuts and things like deregulation that Republican administrations including the Trump administration are likely to work with them on. So they tend to play a king of good cop bad cop dynamic with the far left. The business community tends to just tends its rhetoric tends to be more that the restrictionists are just wrong. I find they quote a business roundtable Chamber of Commerce joint statements you know they will say things like a 2015 report by the Chamber of Commerce showed that in the aggregate immigrant workers do not depress the wages of American workers nor do they take away jobs. [SCOTT WALTER] That, of course, is probably the single most disputed question [MIKE WATSON] That question is extremely disputed; it is in many ways the crux of all the debate and the science is not helpful because it really depends on who you ask [SCOTT WALTER] Yes, there is a George one of the one of the on the opposite side of what you just quoted would be George Morris of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard who takes a very much different view. [MIKE WATSON] right on the one here, on the one hand, you have George poor house on the other hand you have you know a number of economists who say that it's either a wash or that it actually increases native opportunity in the long run in the at least in the long run. [SCOTT WALTER] Yeah though it's understandable perhaps that people in declining steel towns or far or other places would struggle to accept that [MIKE WATSON] If the long run hasn't arrived yet, you can you can get a bit you can get a bit jumpy without necessarily having any having any malicious intent [SCOTT WALTER] Yep now what about the left-wing influencers in this debate, their motives have also been seriously questioned? [MIKE WATSON] Yes, the Right not without cause which we will get to tends to believe that the left is acting in a sort of naked partisan interest almost like gerrymandering it is not a secret that immigrants at least in the first generation tend to be left-of-center. The lower the, you know Heritage Foundation immigration scholars openly said in an in an opinion piece that low skill immigration quote arbitrarily shifts the political balance in the United States. [SCOTT WALTER] Now and that Center for American Progress that you mentioned a little bit ago which has sometimes by its critics been referred to as the Democratic Party's PR firm they had a little embarrassing leak recently suggesting there may be some truth to this. [MIKE WATSON] So the Center for American Progress is 501 C4 organization the Center for American Progress Action Fund which may be better known to the public as the publishers of the blog ThinkProgress, put out and put out a memo which was signed by a former Clinton campaign operative that said that legalizing not just the recipients of DACA but also anyone who would have been eligible under any circumstances for DACA quoteÉ is quote Òa critical component of the Democratic Party's future electoral success.Ó Statements like that do not dispel the narrative do very little to dispel the notion that the left ideological left-wing groups are operating in a partisan interest and it actually gets you know more amusing. So NBC News I want to say last late and earlier this week or late last week we ran a breathless story about Russian nationals who were coming to South Florida and staying at among other places various Trump Organization properties to have their children in the United States obviously under the current I believe correct I will not dispute interpretation of the 14th amendment, anyone born in the United States and subject to our laws which is basically taken to mean not foreign diplomats who have diplomatic immunity, is a US citizen. Many immigration restrictions don't like this because it means that if you're a foreign national you come to the United States you have a child now you have a tie to the United States that child can't sponsor you for a green card until they're older but immigration courts are loath to break up families for an entirely understandable reason but it does if you're an immigration restrictionists which I am NOT creates a creates a policy problem. So NBC News was breathless about the fact that Russian nationals are doing this, and we're some of them are staying at Trump properties of course in 2015 they had bashed Jeb Bush also not an immigration restrictionist because he had expressed concern about how many foreign nationals were coming to the US for what is often called birth tourism. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes, well that we should say that our friends at Hillsdale College would insist that the court's interpretation of the 14th amendment on that question is not correct and [MIKE WATSON] I never denied it was disputed. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes the because it would seem that, well to take this example if you are a Russian mobster and you happen to come to America in order to have your child you're no more subject to the laws than the French ambassadorÕs wife is if she happens to have it her child in Georgetown at the Embassy. But anyway there's one more too just to get all the accusations on the table I think there's also the conservative accusations against the business community and it's the motivations behind its desire for lots of guest worker visas? Right so you mentioned guest workers so I'll throw a throw a little last author a little asterisk there the H visas which are not technically immigrant visas but that's a bunch of confusing legalese which allows certain workers it's like agriculture high-tech and there are some low skill, but there are so few that it's almost not even worth considering for purposes of this discussion. One of the issues with those is that it ties a worker to a firm almost kind of as a semi indentured servant, which made it, so some people even who might otherwise favor high levels of free immigration questioned whether the age programs are legitimate, because they prevent the worker from engaging in free negotiation of their labor. [MIKE WATSON] But generally again we mentioned that one of the most hotly contested premises of the immigration debate is the effect of immigration on native worker wages. Restrictionists believe you know understandably given the position that they take that native worker wages are depressed and that therefore the business community is secretly operating in the interests of lowering native worker wages. Again the evidence is mixed, and it depends on who you ask, and it depends on the assumptions, and it depends on the scale you know I don't believe that either side is arguing it is arguing this point in bad faith even though even though ultimately theoretically only one can be right. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes well and to get one I want to put before we wrap up here I want to put one more motive accusation out there which is which ever Democrat and I think most people would put their money on Dick Durbin leaked the president's scatological remark. His motive has been questioned because to be fair in this town it's pretty it is unusual for such high-level negotiations to have such things leaked out. There are certainly those who accuse Mr. Durbin of doing that in order to rile up their base and squash the possibility of some kind of compromise now, of course, that base can then be driven to the polls. [MIKE WATSON] Right the question of do you want the do you want the issue or do you want a solution is raised especially at the kind of organized left. Like the business community wants a solution on their terms. I think that that's generally clear that's generally how they operate. [SCOTT WALTER They don't have elections they have quarterly earnings. [MIKE WATSON] But you know it is true that for the left having the immigration issue specifically as a moot I have read that specifically is a motivating issue. The issue is not so much citizenship, not so much immigration levels, not so much you know what restriction is sometimes called future flow. The immigrants coming in, as the dealing with a currently illegal population the you know is my aunt you know is your aunt who is not supposed to be here going to be sent from whence she came. You know congressman Gutierrez says vote for me or else yes okay I'll vote for congressman Gutierrez Democrat of Illinois. So again the notion that and especially with the prospects of a democratic wave election where the Democrats even if they wanted a solution could negotiate from a stronger position you know the idea that there would be an intentional attempt to scuttle is not out of the question. [SCOTT WALTER] That is certainly true, and I'm sure lots of motivations go into all of this doctor Samuel Johnson famously said all motives are mixed. [MIKE WATSON] That's a good word to end on. [SCOTT WALTER] Yes that's that's that's the right way to leave this very messy and hotly contested fight over influence on our immigration policies that's our show for this week if you're listening to this on iTunes or Stitcher know that we broadcast a live video version of this podcast at 10:00 a.m. on Thursdays on Facebook Live and YouTube you can find our pages by searching capital Research Center and if you're watching the video version we encourage you to subscribe to the audio on your preferred podcast platform we will see you next week.