Hillary Tacks Right
The Washington Times notes that Hillary Clinton is positioning herself to the right of President Bush on immigration, in preparation for a 2008 presidential run:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is staking out a position on illegal immigration that is more conservative than President Bush, a strategy that supporters and detractors alike see as a way for the New York Democrat to shake the "liberal" label and appeal to traditionally Republican states.In an interview last month on Fox News, Mrs. Clinton said she does not "think that we have protected our borders or our ports or provided our first responders with the resources they need, so we can do more and we can do better."
In an interview on WABC radio, she said: "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants."Unlike many pro-business Republicans, Mrs. Clinton also has castigated Americans for hiring illegal aliens.
It's interesting that she apparently doesn't believe that going conservative on immigration will hurt her among Democratic primary voters--another indication that immigration reform is a bipartisan issue. Looking toward the general election, assuming Hillary were to win the nomination, her opponent, obviously, won't be President Bush. So being to his right on immigration is of limited relevance.
As we've said before, a large majority of Americans wants immigration reform. The main reason we haven't seen it so far is that both parties have been willing to ignore the will of the majority. Once that monopoly is broken--again, assuming Hillary is the nominee--it's hard to imagine that the Republican candidate won't likewise take a more conservative position on immigratiion. Which could, perhaps, lead to real reform at last.
One more thought: Hillary's relatively conservative stand on immigration is part and parcel of her relatively conservative view (for a Democrat) of the war on terror. She is betting, I think, that in 2008 security will be as pivotal an issue with voters as it is now. If the Bush administration is as successful over the next four years in preventing terrorist attacks as it has been for the last three, that may or may not prove to be true.
