Does the GOP listen to a minority - or its base?

Longtime readers may know that some of my readers are on the opposite side of the immigration issue as I, and the other day one sent along a report attempting to convince me of dire consequences if the GOP doesn't follow the Democrats as the party of amnesty. One of the findings of this report by America's Voice is that Latinos distrust the GOP on immigration and switched over a four year period from being Bush voters to Obama voters. Then again, one needs to question the mindset of the group when the report is released in a press conference with:

The America’s Voice report “The Power of the Latino Vote” was released yesterday during a telephonic press conference with Eliseo Medina, Executive Vice President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU); Janet Murguía, President of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR); and Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice.

Undoubtedly, each of these groups has an interest in unfettered immigration, particularly the SEIU - you don't think they'd love to organize these low-skill workers for the millions in union dues they can shift to the Democratic Party?

Given that backing, it's no wonder they try to convince Republicans they have the wrong view; but in truth even if the GOP completely changed its position to advocate for amnesty they'd be better off attempting to woo voters in downtown San Francisco. In many respects the Latino population is like the black population and will likely languish in poverty the same way, just with poverty pimps who speak Spanish.

On the other hand, the base that the GOP counts on doesn't want amnesty, and it's a stance which appeals to those union households who were the backbone of the Reagan Democrats.

A Zogby poll conducted in November asked a cross-section of Americans their views on immigration with specific attention paid to business executives, union households, and small business owners. As documented by the Center for Immigration Studies, these groups overwhelmingly believe that amnesty is not the way to go.

Something tells me that a number of these people also comprise a goodly portion of TEA Party activists - the ones who stayed home on Election Day 2008 because they were disillusioned with a GOP candidate who was perceived as pro-amnesty in John McCain. Yet even the pro-amnesty side concedes that:

Last week, Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) sent a political warning to his fellow Democrats: if immigration reform doesn’t pass, as promised, Latinos won’t vote.

Thus, the threat posed by the pro-amnesty side may be a hollow one, and I'd rather take my chances on not losing the votes of the TEA Party people who have been ready and raring to go to the polls by stopping amnesty than worry about Latino voters who may or may not show up - chances are that the heavily Latino districts would vote Democrat anyway just as heavily black districts do.

Do we need immigration reform? Yes, we do. But the first steps need to be making our border more secure and verifying that illegals aren't getting the jobs Americans can do, along with reforming the visa system to help us root out scofflaws who overstay.

The question becomes whether we are a nation which sacrifices the rule of law for the almighty buck, and allowing those who cross illegally to become legal citizens without significant penalty flies in the face of those law-abiding immigrants who went about chasing the American Dream the right way. While Ronald Reagan was a great President, one of his biggest mistakes was agreeing to amnesty for millions of illegals in 1986 - it was the root of the immigration problem we have now.