From the WSJ Opinion Archives
POTOMAC WATCH
Kemp, Bennett
Commit Grievous
Act of Loyalty
(Editor's note: This column originally appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Oct. 28, 1994. To return to today's column, click here.)
"His act of stupidity has knocked him right out of the presidential race," howls Rep. Dana Rohrabacher.
The dyspeptic California Republican is referring to Jack Kemp, who has spoken out against that state's Proposition 187, which would deny public education and some other nonemergency public services to illegal immigrants.
But some of us remember 1978, when another national conservative opposed another popular California proposition, which would have barred gay teachers from classrooms. "To march to the drums of the homosexuals has irrevocably damaged him nationally," howled the proposal's sponsor, GOP state Sen. John Briggs.
He was referring to Ronald Reagan.
Republicans are now damning Jack Kemp's betrayal, which was aided by that other GOP socialist, Bill Bennett. But as the Gipper knew, sometimes the purest act of loyalty is disagreement. The pair have done Republicans a service by flashing caution on an issue that could easily careen into nativism.
Conservatives have a point that Mr. Kemp is keeping some odd company in opposing 187. The liberals now praising Mr. Kemp's courage care less about defending immigrants than they do about preserving the welfare state. But those same conservatives know that 187's main cheerleader is Gov. Pete Wilson, who also doesn't mind the welfare state.
Meanwhile, Mr. Kemp has plenty of company on the principled right. Entrepreneur Ron Unz, who won 34% of the vote in a primary against Mr. Wilson, began the GOP fight against 187. He lobbied strategist Bill Kristol, who was joined by the Cato Institute's contrarian libertarian, Stephen Moore, in convincing Mr. Bennett. Steve Merksamer, chief of staff to former Gov. George Deukmejian, counseled Mr. Kemp to speak up.
A few candidates in California have also spoken with silence. Neither Matt Fong, the Chinese-American running for treasurer, nor Attorney General Dan Lungren, a future candidate for governor, has surfed on the 187 wave.
Conservative opponents don't argue, as liberal moralists do, that 187's supporters are bigots. Support for 187 is even understandable as a populist scream against a political class that refuses to repair a fraying social contract. But this public anger is aimed less at immigrants than at a welfare state that offers them something for nothing.
Even Mr. Wilson may now sense this distinction, because he's dropped the harsh tone of his earlier immigration ads. His new one this week declares that "American citizenship is a treasure beyond measure. But now the rules are being broken. . . . Pete Wilson has had the courage to say enough is enough and to stand up for Californians who work hard, pay taxes and obey the laws."
Yet Mr. Wilson seems to be using the immigration issue precisely to avoid challenging the size and scope of government. He sure didn't cut much in his first term. California public employees have multiplied by some 8,000 to 268,500, despite a loss of 428,000 private-sector jobs. And state spending has climbed by $4 billion to $55.4 billion, despite cries of austerity.
And while California's taxes are among the nation's highest, Mr. Wilson is that rare GOP candidate this year who isn't running on tax cuts. Instead the former marine, a divining rod of American anxiety, has changed the subject to crime and immigration. Those hot buttons have won back conservatives and Reagan Democrats, who might have turned away if his challenger, Democrat Kathleen Brown, were a tax-cutter like Christie Whitman.
Mr. Wilson is lucky he isn't pressed about who really is responsible for immigration costs. Illegal immigration is much less a burden in Texas, which sustains a much less generous welfare state. One 1985 study found that 85% of all refugees in California were on welfare within three years. But in Texas fewer than 20% were. Of course it's easier to campaign against illegal immigrants, who don't vote, than against welfare lobbies and teachers unions, which surely do.
One benefit of 187 is that it would force a reconsideration of a 1982 Supreme Court decision that infringed on a state's ability to restrict entitlements. But that must be balanced against the signal 187 would send to both parties. Already Mr. Wilson has endorsed an immigration "I.D. card," which would expand police powers while still being vulnerable to fraud. Others want to repeat the 1920s and stop even legal immigration, a major U.S. economic advantage.
"I see the party on a slippery slope," says Mr. Kemp, "where there could be a 1996 platform plank from xenophobes and protectionists for a Fortress America."
It's a sign of our cynical age that by standing on principle Mr. Kemp is widely assumed to be taking himself out of the 1996 presidential race. Is that true? "No," Mr. Kemp replies. "This is just the thing to get me to run and fight for the future of my party."
