McClatchy has a good item today about the odd nature of the fight among Republican presidential hopefuls over immigration — we’re watching candidates who embraced relatively progressive policies attack each other while moving to the hard-right.
[Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney] each ran a jurisdiction that’s arguably among the nation’s most tolerant, where cracking down on illegal immigrants wasn’t good politics.
But now, Giuliani, the mayor of New York from 1994 to 2001, and Romney, the governor of Massachusetts from 2003 through January, are battling for the Republican presidential nomination amid an uproar over illegal immigration. So they’re gritting their teeth, squaring their shoulders and vowing to throw the bums out and keep them out.
The result has been a schoolyard brawl.
And a fairly silly one at that. Giuliani attacks Romney for not taking immigration concerns seriously as governor. He’s right. Romney attacks Giuliani for openly accepting illegal immigrants into New York City. He’s right, too. Both attack John McCain for his support of Bush’s policy. They’re right, too.
We’re dealing with a group of leading candidates going after each other for embracing the same approach that each of them have already embraced.
For Giuliani, that’s particularly problematic.
David Brooks, much to the former mayor’s dismay, uncovered a terrific speech Giuliani gave at Harvard in 1996.
“I’m pleased to be with you this evening to talk about the anti-immigrant movement in America,” [Giuliani] said, “and why I believe this movement endangers the single most important reason for American greatness, namely, the renewal, reformation and reawakening that’s provided by the continuous flow of immigrants.”
Giuliani continued: “I believe the anti-immigrant movement in America is one of our most serious public problems.” It can “be seen in legislation passed by Congress and the president.” (Republicans had just passed a welfare reform law that restricted benefits to legal immigrants.) “It can be seen in the negative attitudes being expressed by many of the politicians.”
Giuliani said, somewhat unfairly, that the anti-immigrant movement at that time continued the fear-mongering and discrimination of the nativist movements of the 1920s and the Know-Nothing movement of the 19th century. He celebrated Abraham Lincoln for having the courage to take on the anti-immigrant forces. He detailed the many ways immigration benefits the nation.
Then he turned to the subject of illegal immigration: “The United States has to do a lot better job of patrolling our borders.” But, he continued, “The reality is, people will always get in.”
“In New York City,” he said, “we recognize this reality. New York City’s policy toward undocumented immigrants is called ‘Executive Order 124.’ ” This order protected undocumented immigrants from being reported when they used city services. Giuliani was then fighting the federal government, which wanted to reverse it.
“There are times,” he declared, “when undocumented aliens must have a substantial degree of protection.” They must feel safe sending their children to school. They should feel safe reporting crime to the police. “Similarly, illegal and undocumented immigrants should be able to seek medical help without the threat of being reported. When these people are sick, they are just as sick and just as contagious as citizens.”
Giuliani, of course, doesn’t want anything to do with these comments now. Indeed, he insists that he no longer believes any of this, and the way he governed as mayor will have no bearing on how he’ll govern as president.
Brooks argues today that the Giuliani we saw at Harvard is “the real Rudy.” That’s the one who once declared, “If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you’re one of the people who we want in this city.”
But here’s my question for Brooks: how do we know? Who’s to say which Giuliani is the “real” one? How do we know there even is a “real” one?
Given recent history, I half expect Giuliani to concede that he welcomed illegal immigrants to his city as mayor, but he knew at the time what a mistake that was.