Is Newt Gingrich acting like a human being on immigration reform?

In a Republican field dominated by ideologues who, in playing to their far right supporters, will say nearly anything to get elected, Newt Gingrich stands out.  He does not, apparently, believe undocumented immigrants are should be fodder for crocodiles in border moats or that all 12 million should be rounded up, Gestapo style, and deported en masse.  We (sort of) commend him for his "humanitarian vision", for a Republican presidential candidate that is.

Lest we forget, Governor Rick Perry of Texas also espoused hints of common sense too, with his unpopular stance on educating the children of undocumented immigrants via in-state tuition.

Let’s look more closely at Gingrich’s proposal. Here is what he said in last week’s national security debate on CNN:

“I’m prepared to take the heat for saying, let’s be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship but by finding a way to create legality so that they are not separated from their families. If you’ve been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grand kids, you’ve been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don’t think we’re going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out.”

As if we needed any more reasons to discount Michelle Bachmann as a serious contender, she predictably labeled the Gingrich immigration plan “amnesty” for all illegal immigrants…

Unfortunately, Gingrich’s key bullet points are: 1) “without giving them citizenship” and 2) his 25-year minimum residence restriction. 
The only possible reason Gingrich would deny undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship, as the majority of comprehensive immigration reform proposals do, is because he fears these new citizens will vote Democratic.

But even in Arizona, 78 percent support a path to citizenship under certain conditions.

However, his 25-year minimum residency requirement may be the deal killer. Think about this for a minute.  How could we determine if someone has been in the U.S. for Gingrich’s minimum 25 years? And why not 20, 15, or even 10 years? And what about the process and resources required to examine millions of applications for legal status? By one estimate it would take 5,769 person-years to vet the population of undocumented immigrants.

Just as important, what do we do about those who have not been here for his required minimum period of time?  Do we do as flip flopper Mitt Romney has suggested—make their (illegal immigrants) lives so miserable they “will self-retreat to their native countries”? Do you really think the entire country should follow Alabama’s boondoggle?

Don’t be fooled by Gingrich’s unworkable, so-called humane “plan” for the undocumented. We need true comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for those who want it, a guest worker program for migrant workers, continued birthright citizenship, and passage of the DREAM Act.