About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Ignoring own reporting, AP claimed McCain "is respected by many Hispanics for refusing to pander to anti-immigrant sentiment"

July 13, 2008 6:13 pm ET
image

SUMMARY: An Associated Press article claimed that Sen. John McCain "is respected by many Hispanics for refusing to pander to anti-immigrant sentiment over the years." But the AP reported in November 2007 that McCain now "emphasizes securing the borders first" and quoted McCain stating: "I understand why you would call it a, quote, shift. ... I say it is a lesson learned about what the American people's priorities are. And their priority is to secure the borders."

24 Comments

A July 13 Associated Press article, headlined "Hispanic voters pose challenge in their diversity, making for awkward outreach by candidates," asserted that Sen. John McCain "is respected by many Hispanics for refusing to pander to anti-immigrant sentiment over the years." However, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented, McCain has reversed his position on immigration to more closely conform to the views of the GOP base. McCain now says that "we've got to secure the borders first" -- a position at odds with his prior assertion that border security could not be disaggregated from other aspects of comprehensive immigration reform. McCain further stated during the January 30 Republican presidential debate that he would not vote for the comprehensive reform bill he co-sponsored with Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) if it came to a vote on the Senate floor. A November 4, 2007, AP article reporting on McCain's reversal noted that McCain now "emphasizes securing the borders first," and also quoted McCain stating: "I understand why you would call it a, quote, shift. ... I say it is a lesson learned about what the American people's priorities are. And their priority is to secure the borders."

From the November 4, 2007, AP article (retrieved from the Nexis news database):

John McCain spent months earlier this year arguing that the United States must combine border security efforts with a temporary worker program and an eventual path to citizenship for many illegal immigrants.

Now, the Republican presidential candidate emphasizes securing the borders first. The rest, he says, is still needed but will have to come later.

"I understand why you would call it a, quote, shift," McCain told reporters Saturday after voters questioned him on his position during back-to-back appearances in this early voting state. "I say it is a lesson learned about what the American people's priorities are. And their priority is to secure the borders."

The shift in approach is likely to draw criticism from McCain's GOP opponents. Immigration has been a flash point in the race, with rivals Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson all seizing on it.

McCain, who has led on the issue in the Senate with Democrat Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, got a wake-up call of sorts in June when Congress again failed to enact a broad immigration proposal that he championed and that split the country.

The measure also exposed deep divisions within the Republican Party, and McCain's high-profile support for it hurt him politically. During debate on the issue as spring turned into summer, the Arizona senator saw his poll numbers in some early primary states slip and his fundraising wane.

Early in the year, McCain told Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina voters the country must take a comprehensive approach strengthening the borders as well as creating a temporary worker program and providing millions of illegal immigrants the opportunity to earn citizenship if they meet certain criteria.

Over the past few months, he has stressed border security first and said border-state governors should certify their borders are secure before making other needed immigration changes.

McCain said he listened to what the public was saying when the legislation failed and responded accordingly.

"I said, OK. We'll secure the borders, but after we secure the borders, we'll have a temporary worker program, we'll have to address the 12 million people here illegally, and I think the best way is the proposal that we had," McCain said.

"It's not a switch in position. I support the same solution. But we've got to secure the borders first," he added.

In a March 3 New York Times article, Elisabeth Bumiller wrote, "Senator John McCain likes to present himself as the candidate of the "Straight Talk Express" who does not pander to voters or change his positions with the political breeze. But the fine print of his record in the Senate indicates that he has been a lot less consistent on some of his signature issues than he has presented himself to be so far in his presidential campaign." The article stated that McCain "has also expressed varying positions on immigration, torture, abortion and Donald H. Rumsfeld, the former defense secretary." On immigration, Bumiller wrote:

Mr. McCain has also moved from his original position on immigration. In 2005, he joined forces with Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, to co-sponsor an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws. Although the legislation included toughening border security, its center was a provision that would have provided a pathway to citizenship for many of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States.

Conservatives immediately branded the bill as amnesty and fired steadily at Mr. McCain. After seeing his campaign and his fund-raising efforts derail last summer -- which his advisers attributed in large part to his position on immigration -- Mr. McCain now says that he got the message from voters. These days he speaks almost exclusively about border security, although he does say that it is not possible to deport 12 million illegal immigrants and that he would never deport the mother of a soldier serving in Iraq.

Additionally, in a June 20 Politico piece, contributing columnist and Washington journalist Gebe Martinez reported on McCain's reversal on immigration:

McCain, the Arizona senator, dismayed Latinos last year when he stepped back from his immigration bill that would have tightened the borders and legalized undocumented immigrants. As boos and hisses from angry Republican conservatives grew louder at campaign events, he switched course and vowed to "first" secure the borders. Were his failed bill to come up again, he would not vote for it, he said.

[...]

Trying to regain Latino support, McCain has chastised Republicans who stoke the fires of the immigration at election time. And at a private meeting with Chicago-area Latinos last week, he promised to push for a comprehensive immigration bill.

"It sounds like he's trying to have it both ways, and it's not convincing anyone," said Frank Sharry, who also was involved in immigration bill negotiations when he headed the National Immigration Forum.

This is not the McCain Hispanics thought they knew. Even after the 2001 terrorist attacks placed an emphasis on national security, McCain's speeches to Latino audiences and on the Senate floor prioritized the compassionate side of the immigration argument.

He understood that border security "first" means "deportation only" in the eyes of immigrant activists, and he championed a broader approach.

As the Senate mulled immigration in 2006, McCain often stood in the Capitol's corridors, pounding his fist in the air, arguing that border enforcement would not work without simultaneously penalizing employers who hire workers illegally, creating a temporary worker program and finding a way to bring 12 million illegal immigrants "out of the shadows" of society.

"It won't work! It won't work!" he protested of suggestions to do enforcement first. The stool cannot stand on one leg.

From the July 13 AP article:

Both candidates are pressing their case in three speeches in as many weeks to Hispanic umbrella groups and working in other ways to make their outreach more sophisticated. Republicans have opened an office in Orlando, where most of the state's Puerto Ricans live, and Obama opens one this week in Ybor City

They've both got their work cut out for them in appealing to a large and growing segment of the population that has leaned Democratic but has not always been motivated to vote. A recent AP-Yahoo News poll found Obama leading McCain 47 percent to 22 percent among Hispanic voters, with 26 percent undecided.

McCain is respected by many Hispanics for refusing to pander to anti-immigrant sentiment over the years. Yet he is viewed in some Latin quarters as a sequel to the unpopular President Bush, a problem he has with voters at large, too.

Obama's vitality and soaring oratory appeal to Hispanics just as they do to others. Whoops of approval were heard throughout his speech this week to the League of United Latin American Citizens' convention.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by snoopy (July 13, 2008 7:02 pm ET)
         

      Yup, that's some real strong respect there for McSame...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by princeofwheels (July 14, 2008 10:12 am ET)
           
        And you expect people to understand this...It needs BIG RED arrows. O'reilly, give a call please.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by infinity5551913 (July 13, 2008 7:03 pm ET)
         
      La Raza is a insurgent dangerous organization that would swamp America with a continuous influx of poor from third world countries. The race as it's called has seditious ideas to return the Southwest to Mexico. However, absolute fanatical this might seem this is their philosophy they preach amongst the Latino people's. This organization supports driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, in-state tuition discounts for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding U.S. citizens and law-abiding legal immigrants. They vehemently opposes cooperative immigration enforcement efforts between local, state and federal authorities. There in opposition to the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088), that would enforce mandatory employer sanction nationwide. They opposes a secure fence on the southern border, These anti-sovereignty advocates bitterly protested common-sense voter ID provisions as an “absolute disgrace that would eliminate voter fraud. They have consistently opposed post-9/11 national security measures at every turn and is currently leading a smear campaign against staunch anti-immigration enforcement leaders. These zealot voices have called for TV and cable news networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves — in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut off our right to 'Free Speech." They sponsor militant ethnic nationalist charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars (at least $8 million in federal education grants). The Race” has perfected the art of the PC shakedown at taxpayer expense, pushing relentlessly to lower home loan standards for Hispanic borrowers, reaping millions in federal “mortgage counseling” grants, seeking special multi million-dollar earmarks and partnering with banks that do business with illegal aliens. NUMBERSUSA
      Report Abuse
      • Author by eweston8542983 (July 14, 2008 11:09 am ET)
           

        Amazing and here I thought La Raza was mostly a social organization. What gave them away as "a (an?) insurgent dangerous organization that would swamp America with acontinuous influx of poor from third world countries." How insideous, how are they accomplishing this ultimate attack on Amerika? Seditious, absolute fanatical, Hitting all the hot buttons there, examples, proof?Anti-sovereignty advocates? anarchist's maybe? Somehow and after much pushing by the Justice Department, how many successful cases of voter fraud have been sustained in the courts? How many legal citizens have been deniged the right to vote by voter caging?

        Ah you've managed to slime both the population and Fairness Doctrine in one sentence.

        In short your quite a piece of work. Feel free to attually try to back up any of your accusations with evidence, or continue to spew, character assasinate, carry on like you know what your talking about. You have a good comand of neocon talking points, You got anything besides them?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 14, 2008 11:52 am ET)
           

        How the weather up there in the mountains?  Got enough guns, ammo and canned food?  Just be careful - you never know when "they'll" be coming for you!

         I love it.  A strawman argument being made by someone who "if they only had a brain"...

        Report Abuse
    • Author by mefirst (July 13, 2008 9:12 pm ET)
         
      i wonder if any of the groups like lulac have an opinion on the fact that the mexican government secures it's southern border against those who try to come across.  or is that only reserved for this country?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Damian G. (July 14, 2008 1:10 am ET)
         

      Wait, wait, wait.

      What's the problem here?

      This is only a contradiction on the AP's part if one assumes that McCain's shift on illegal immigration was brought about by people who are anti-immigrant and/or bigoted.  MMFA is assuming that opposition to "comprehensive immigration reform" was only from those who were bigoted and not at all from those who disagreed with granting legal status to those who flouted American law as well as those who were concerned that we would see a repeat of the mistake President Reagan made two decades ago when he made illegal aliens citizens but left the borders unchecked.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jawill11 (July 14, 2008 10:13 am ET)
           
        What makes immigrants so special in the minds of conservatives that they are the only people who have to follow the rule of law?  War crimes, torture, Constitutional violations, bribes, sex crimes, illegal use of prosecutorial power, those are all a-ok.  But, if you came over to try and make a better life for you and your family, you're an evil criminal.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by dave (July 14, 2008 11:50 am ET)
             

           I highly doubt that Conservative voters defend any of those things. But I, as a Conservative voter, do not wish to allow illegally invading parasites to come over here unchecked, even if it is to make a better life for themselves. Go through the process no matter what, become legal, and if you don't like the amount of time it takes....tough...stay home. Its bad enough that I have to pay my already high enough taxes to support the underpriviledged here already because of the ever increasing lefty programs without having to pay for the healthcare of those among us who shouldn't be here in the first place.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by jawill11 (July 14, 2008 3:19 pm ET)
               

            I highly doubt that Conservative voters defend any of those things.

            Anybody that voted for Bush in 2004, a republican in 2006, or any republican in 2008 is defending all of those crimes.  Luckily, most of America is not willing to defend such horrible actions. 

            Also, luckily most of America realizes that throwing a pair of bootstraps at somebody is not an effective or logical policy.  Regardless of any type of ethical or moral argument, it just doesn't work and ends up costing more money in the long run from a variety of different angles. 

            Report Abuse
        • Author by historygeek001 (July 14, 2008 2:58 pm ET)
             

          Jawill:

          Nice points--Conservatives and Neocons ignore the Bush regime's law-breaking and concentrate on laws broken by the destitute.

          Immigration is a hairy issue--for example, how much responsibility should we accept for situations we have caused/aggravated in other countries?  Should that affect how we accept immigrants from those countries (like Iraq or Colombia)?  Illegal immigration is a problem, and I wish I had a simple solution for it.  Unfortunately, there isn't one. 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by jawill11 (July 14, 2008 3:15 pm ET)
               

            It's a very complicated issue.  One that would never be solved by a fence.  I have a fence in my backyard and everyday it is overcome by raccoons, cats, and rabbits. 

            I think that we need to look at it in a reasonable and humane way.  People are coming over to better themselves.  We will never be able to stop that as long as what they have here is so much better than what they are leaving.  Severe punishment will not stop that, and even if it did, is it the right way to go?  My opinion is that the people here need to be brought into the legal system and we need to come up with an easier way to make legal immigration a practical option for people, but ultimately put diplomatic pressure on Mexico to improve their domestic situation.  Nobody wants to talk about that part because our corporate culture is geting too many sweetheart deals from the Mexican regime, and that is the only important thing to them.  They love the fact that they have those deals, the cheap labor, and an issue that they can rile up their base with.  Why would they ever want to change that?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by historygeek001 (July 14, 2008 4:03 pm ET)
                 

              I'm largely in agreement with you.  Our bizarre trade and imigration policies have created a situation where people are coming here to find work (in part) because of our own policies, and the people who seem to most despise illegal immigration are those who have set up and benefit from the situation as it is.  We aren't enforcing the laws we have, draconian punishments are not effective, and we need to get people into the legal system.  Rabid hatred of immigrants is not the answer, nor is blanket amnesty; we need to address the causes before we can solve the problem.

              Report Abuse
            • Author by mefirst (July 14, 2008 6:24 pm ET)
                 

              the idea that a fence will not work is false.  one of the biggest was approved and constructed during the clinton administration, along the tijuana-san diego border.   it cut illegal crossings dramatically.  and if mexicans are unhappy with nafta, they have a simple solution.  vote in a government that will withdraw from it.  it takes 6 months notice.  we also do not need to pretend that our problems with immigration will be solved by allowing more people in legally.  we have enough people in this country.  the public school system in california is on the verge of collapse.  families of students are being asked to make cash donations to keep teachers from being fired, and many school districts are considering cancelling sports programs.  my niece attends college in the l.a. area and there are  non stop traffic jams from early morning until well into the evening.  we need to return to the relatively low levels of immigration that have been the norm for most of this country's history.  anyone advocating more people is advocating more destruction of the environment, the depleting of our resources, and making goals like energy independence harder to achieve. 

               

              Report Abuse
        • Author by Damian G. (July 14, 2008 6:37 pm ET)
             
          Because, as we all know, ALL Democrats are innocent of ALL of those crimes, too.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (July 14, 2008 12:28 pm ET)
         

      Surprise, they automatically contribute to our system. Income taxes, SS, etc, automatically deducted, like the majority of working stiffs in this country. Do they get all the advantagous of a legal worker? Course not.

      Failure to deal with the root causes of the "Wave" of immigration is to be able to critisize something while doing zip to cure it. Surprise again, the root cause ain't the folks heading north. Their merely an effect, among a number of socially corrosive effects sponsered in part, sometimes wholly, by some of our own companies. This is a national security issue. It deserves more attension to causes than effects. As much fun as it might be to bash a part of that effect.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dave (July 14, 2008 2:06 pm ET)
         
      Surprise, not even close. If you can with a straight face tell me that illegally invading parasites contribute more to this country than they take from it, I'd love to hear it. And of course they don't get the advantages that the legal worker gets....they are illegal.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (July 14, 2008 2:53 pm ET)
         

      An interesting proposition, which if you're paying attension, I did. The brown tide is just a convenient other for you to hate. Your path would continue to be an easy one, and as no solution is present there, just someone else's problem. Theoretically you could continue to screech about it to your dying day.

      Swell hobby there. Swell up again sometime.      

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.

  • Associated Press
    Associated Press

    The Associated Press
    450 W. 33rd St.
    New York, NY 10001

    Main Number
    +1-212-621-1500