I remember the good ol’ days, sometimes called “2005,” when Mike Huckabee was fairly reasonable on immigration. He supported in-state college tuition for children of illegal immigrants and opposed an immigration raid of a poultry plant that led to the deportation of illegal immigrants. More recently, he endorsed Bush’s immigration policy, denounced in right-wing circles as “amnesty.” Huckabee insisted that he supports measures that “provide[s] a path for workers to become legal,” and denounced conservative critics of immigration reform, condemning them for being “driven by racism or nativism.” He even declined to have state police enforce immigration laws, despite the go-ahead from Arkansas lawmakers.
When he addressed the issue, he’d talk about “compassion” and “morality.” Huckabee saw an ugly side of his party when it came to immigration, and he didn’t like it. He made no effort to hide his belief that immigrations, legal or not, contributed to the U.S. economy, and saw little reason to change.
That is, until he gained a legitimate shot at the Republican presidential nomination. A month ago, he “released a new plan calling for all illegal workers to register with federal authorities and return to their native countries within 120 days.” This week, it gets worse — much worse.
Mike Huckabee wants to amend the Constitution to prevent children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens from automatically becoming American citizens, according to his top immigration surrogate — a radical step no other major presidential candidate has embraced.
Mr. Huckabee, who won last week’s Republican Iowa caucuses, promised Minuteman Project founder James Gilchrist that he would force a test case to the Supreme Court to challenge birthright citizenship, and would push Congress to pass a 28th Amendment to the Constitution to remove any doubt.
My first thought was that Gilchrist might be wrong about Huckabee’s intentions, but when the far-right Washington Times asked the Huckabee campaign for comment, a spokesperson did not dispute Gilchrist’s assessment.
There’s been quite a bit of right-wing pandering and flip-flopping of late, but I’m a little surprised Huckabee would stoop this low. Indeed, Huckabee has now carved out a niche all his own.
The 14th Amendment says “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Huckabee now rejects this, and is the only candidate in the field who supports a constitutional amendment to undo what the 14th Amendment did.
It’s pretty obvious that the right, which knows all about Huckabee’s record on the issue, isn’t impressed. Take National Review’s Mark Levin, for example.
Heading into South Carolina, where illegal immigration appears to be the biggest issue among Republicans, Huckabee is going to support a constitutional amendment prohibiting birthright citizenship? Did I not hear him in several debates, including on Sunday, admonishing those of us who’ve long opposed birthright citizenship, about God’s children coming out of the shadows? Is this not the same man who only a few months ago supported McCain-Kennedy?
Romney has explained his conversion on abortion — the day it occurred, how it occurred, and why it occurred. We have to make judgments about the credibility of a politician making a conversion, based on their records, recent statements, and ultimately, character. You can accept it or not. But for Huckabee to throw on the table such a dramatic shift of position from one day to the next, just before the South Carolina primary, without ever indicating such a view during any of the debates or in any of his many media appearances since the beginning of his run for president, is to me as cynical as it gets in a season of cynical acts.
It’s the funny thing about pandering; if the audience doesn’t believe you, it doesn’t work.
Update: Via Chris, Huckabee is now denying the accuracy of the Washington Times report.