Immigration Reform Trapped in Political Dualism
New America Media, Commentary, Roberto Lovato, Posted: Dec 02, 2008
Editor’s Note: Obama’s appointments to positions that would affect immigration policy have drawn praise from advocates. But NAM contributor Roberto Lovato sees contradictory messages in the team being assembled.
Recent talk about "immigration reform" coming from Washington inspires some hope, some fear and lots of reminders about what I call "political-dualism": the ability of a President or political party to simultaneously communicate opposing policies while delivering either no new policies or exceptionally bad ones.
As the Obama Administration prepares to take the reins of the massive and massively inefficient and broken immigration system, it is important to have clarity about the incontrovertible need to overcome the political dualism that created our immigration mess in the first place.
My first practical experience of lobbying and of political dualism came during the Clinton years. At that time, in the mid-‘90s, I was head of Central American Resource Center ( CARECEN), then the country's largest immigrant rights organization. Like many immigrant rights activists today, my colleagues at CARECEN and around the country and I marched and protested and sued and lobbied to end the undocumented status of immigrants.
In one case, for example, we sought to secure legal status for the hundreds of thousands of Central American refugees denied political asylum and other forms of legalization by both the Reagan and Bush I Administrations due to the Republican's politicization of the immigration process. In the end, our many efforts yielded only partial success in the form of what is known as Temporary Protective Status (TPS) granted by the first Bush Administration.
Much like the rising tide of expectations today, the triumphal return of the Democrats to the White House in 1992 brought with it expectations –and official promises- of an immigration reform, one that would legalize Salvadorans and Guatemalans living under TPS. TPS allows immigrants to work temporarily in the country, but does nothing to remove the specter of vulnerability before employers, landlords and others who exploit immigrants' temporary status for economic and personal gain.
Images of my cousin, Maria, crying alone in her room because of oppressive hotel bosses and because of her inability to see her son, who she left and had not seen since he was 3 years old, remain with me as a reminder of the perils and pain of temporary and undocumented status.
I remember how Clinton Administration officials with impressive credentials like Alex Aleinikoff and others charged with immigration matters, told us in un-Republican and friendly terms, that "We definitely want to resolve the TPS issue- but right now is not the right time." Eight years after the Clinton Administration led the Democrats return to power, Maria and other immigrants with TPS saw no change in their legal status. And, now, nearly 20 years since TPS was first instituted, as I watch how Republican rejection and the Democrats’ political dualism have left many TPS holders and more than 12 million other immigrants living under the tyranny of "temporary" and undocumented status, I find myself struggling with my own dualism: believing in the possibility of "real change" inspired by Obama's presidential campaign while also hearing distant echoes of the Democrats’ immigration siren song.
Consider the conflicted and conflicting recent statements about immigration reform made by Congressional Democratic leaders. Asked last month what she thought about the possibility for immigration reform, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded, "Maybe there never is a path to citizenship if you came here illegally," adding "I would hope that there could be, but maybe there isn't." Asked the same question last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid responded in no uncertain terms, "We've got McCain and we've got a few others. I don't expect much of a fight at all." That such mixed messages would come from the Democrats is much more than another expression of the contradictory views often held by members of the same party. Viewed from the vantage point of the recent and not-so-recent and rather twisted history of non-reform has been immigration policy, these conflicting messages sent by the Democratic leadership should be viewed as a more recent variation on the theme of the political dualism that lead us nowhere.
Hearing recently that Obama had appointed Aleinikoff, the former Clinton operative, as one of the two people leading the immigration policy transition team did little to inspire hope among those of us with a political memory. But Obama's announcement that Stanford scholar, Tino Cuellar, a young, outside-the-Beltway academic whom I've spoken with and who friends in the legal community consider fair, decent and smart, tilted my spirits towards believing change might be possible. But then news of Obama's likely appointment of Arizona Governor and former Clinton-U.S. Attorney appointee, Janet Napolitano, to lead the Department of Homeland Security only reinforced the belief that political dualism may define the Obama legacy on immigration; Napolitano has enthusiastically supported "emergency measures" like militarizing the border to "fight" the "threat" posed by immigrant gardeners, meatpackers and maids like my cousin, Maria; But she has also vetoed at least a few of the more than 75 anti-immigrant measures introduced in Arizona home to the infamous Sheriff, Joe Arpaio.
Arpaio, who is responsible for introducing highly controversial policies like deploying deputies in immigration sweeps of entire Latino neighborhoods, enjoyed the tacit political and financial support for these practices from Napolitano for several years. Napolitano did nothing to curtail the alarming number of deaths in Arpaio's immigrant jails and only decided to yank funding for his immigration program in the middle of the Democratic primary earlier this year.
If anything, the immigrant deaths, racial tensions, incessant raids and other indicators of the failure to improve immigration policy in Arizona provide immigrant advocates like Alexis Mazon of the Tucson-based Coalicion de Derechos Humanos, little inspiration and lots of concern. According to Mazon, Napolitano's record of previous support for Arpaio and for "some of the most dangerous immigration practices of any state in the country" give one no cause for joining the chorus of Democrats, media pundits and Beltway (as opposed to outside-the-Beltway groups like Mazon's) immigration groups gushing over Napolitano's "tough and smart" approach to immigration.
And as the Obama Administration and the rest of us prepare for the possibility of a renewed discussion and debate around immigration reform, those of us outside the Beltway must put terminating political dualism alongside developing and advocating for a real reform agenda at the top of our strategies and actions.
Such a mobilizing approach revived what I remember was a moribund immigration debate of 2006, and nothing less is required now. In addition to mobilizing as they did in 2006, outside-the-Beltway advocates will also have to find new and creative ways to move the debate and discussion around immigration beyond the growing Washington consensus: combining the politically dualistic "tough and smart" policies that legalize immigrants while increasing the number and types of punitive policies that took up 700 of the 800 pages of the failed McCain-Kennedy "liberal" reform proposal.
Transcending the "tough and smart" political dualism of immigration reform means replacing the so-called "tradeoffs" of the McCain-Kennedy bill with "safe and sane" policies that combine legalization with fundamental and necessary changes to our broken immigration system.
The first consideration in any serious reform should be removing the immigration processing functions from the anti-terrorist bureaucracy of the Homeland Security Department and placing them in the Commerce or Justice Departments or some other less national security-focused part of government as has been the case throughout the history of immigration policy.
In addition to a less-punitive approach to legalization than the get tough approach of the McCain-Kennedy bill, out-of-the-Beltway advocates are also advocating for immigration reform policies that consider fair trade and economic development, human rights, U.S. foreign policy and other hemispheric issues that directly influence the flow of migration. Such a firm and steady, yet flexible and inclusive approach to immigration policy fits well Obama's promise of change while also freeing Maria and millions of undocumented immigrants from the perils and pain of political dualism.
Related Articles:
Obama Appoints Cecilia Muñoz
Napolitano: Controversial Figure, Positive Change
Immigration Reform in 2009
Immigration Reform Under Obama Likely to be Piecemeal
Page
1 of 1
|
User Comments
Nezua on Dec 03, 2008 at 17:26:12 said:
Whomever this "Nezzie the Nativist" is, I wish they'd find a better nick.
And "Nezzie," why stop at 1986? I say let's oust every single immigrant and child of immigrants since 1600, how's that? Anyway, stop being a fool. You are surrounded by immigrants and children of immigrants and family members of immigrants. Get used to it. That's most of us.
nativessayno on Dec 03, 2008 at 14:56:38 said:
Roberto, undocumented...please define this for us. The mothers in the beginning of your piece cry because they can't see their children, why not go back home instead of expecting complete strangers to provide empathy and support for their self-interested self-created dilemma? Seems one always gets "played" by these melodramatic ploys to wrench great pity out of US citizens that are a soft touch and out-of-touch with the objective reality of rampant illegal immigration and the myriad problems it entails.
I guess you propose amnesty for at least 20MM "immigrants"...then what? Millions more on their way? God, I hope NOT!!
It is not my country anymore. It somehow is being changed into a Latino country, and I just live here. Where is the logic or even the morality of a group; (latino illegal immigrants being permitted to take over 1/8th of our job market in LA within the recent 2-3 years? They do this with impunity and well...too bad for citizens if they can't get those jobs...Roberto's plan: get Latinos everything and then some, give unmerited benefits to illegal immigrants, or "undocumented workers". Does this make any sense?
Some of the dates he cites in his piece are more to do with persons that merited; sought and received true amnesty due to military and political strife during the '90's. We get no credit for the altruism and generosity we demonstrated then. It is all about getting maximum and unearned legal gains; sorry I've got to ask why? What is the reason or excuse that I have to tolerate illegal persons coming here then calling all the shots? It is crazy/upside-down world rationale at work.
Obama: please be prudent and firm. Send 4/5th of these folks packing...we have an inordinate amount of our own woes. We don't owe others especially when many do not even really care about us whatsoever.
Nezzie-love to read your impassioned remarks, thanks for them.
Trencher on Dec 03, 2008 at 07:17:31 said:
Nezzie is 100% right. As a need for reform I don't really think that is an issue. The real issue is why has the current laws set in place have not been enforced? Why has the government looked the other way while this has been going on for years. We the people haven't looked the other way, and have been complaining for years only to fall on the deaf ears of our elected officials that represent us. The laws need to be enforced, and those that have broken them on both sides need to be punished.
carlos on Dec 02, 2008 at 23:32:48 said:
Caring Human:Illegal aliens have destroyed Los Angeles. Hospital ERs have closed because the illegals use them for free clinics. And as for not getting welfare;they are eligible for FMSA formerly AFDC,WIC,school lunches and breakfasts which they waste and all welfare benefits when they steal YOUR identity.
Javier Rodriguez on Dec 02, 2008 at 17:44:45 said:
Roberto
Good contribution and analysis, however for some reason you did not include the role of the mass movement as the principal element and factor in wresting the coveted legalization from the establishment. Obama and the change of guard in Congress and the White House makes no difference, we still have to push, even harder.
For your information, unfortunatlly we lost the opportunity to lobby Federico Pena in Denver during the DNC immigrant rights march and send a clear message to Obama on the thinking and views of us,the grass roots popular movement, on the type and quality of immigration reform we seek. The control of the program was too controlled in the hands of a few with not too much experience.
Respectfully,
Javier Rodriguez
Los Angeles
Beth on Dec 02, 2008 at 16:56:39 said:
What about that list of things you have been denied? Who stole your job? Really?
I know some illegal aliens. They pay cash for their medical services mire reliably than Administar Federal (that's Medicare for you lay persons). The jobs they do... there are a dozen available positions that stay open because the "legal" folks either flunk their drug tests or quit after a couple days because they don't want to smash their PlayStation finger with a nail gun.
I am much more disgusted my the wreckless disregard of the public trust in Washington with the endless bail-outs to banks and suits who rape and ravage the US tax payer to the tune of TRILLIONS of dollars than I am about the the people who come to do jobs that our lazy kids have deemed beneath them to do. I'm ready to legitimize their work status so we can fully collect all the txes due... sell them some houses... and get this economy moving.
Ken Jones on Dec 02, 2008 at 14:56:13 said:
They might pay some taxes USING SOMEONE ELSES social security number. Here in CA. illegals are draining the economy! Hospitals are closing due to illegals going into the ER's for runny noses, having multiple kids that they can't afford in the first place and knowing that they will automatically become citizens, schools are overcrowded, and now our governor wants to increase taxes because we have no $$. Gee, I wonder why?! If you want to support these law breakers you do it but don't expect me to. By the way, have you looked at Mexico's illegal immigration laws? Much tougher than here. Yes, most illegals come from South of the border. Press 1 for English 2 for Spanish. What a slap in the face!
Nezzie on Dec 02, 2008 at 08:27:49 said:
You are completely wrong Sir. If you steal, you are a criminal, if you invade a soverign nation, you are a criminal. If you have used or forged a document (that are collecting benefits) you are a criminal.
You are correct that American citizens do not want people who don't belong here in the first place, here. We are not "immigrant bashing." We are trying to protect the country that we have built for you and your children to enjoy, where the law is enforced and you can receive charity if you need it.
If you are such a liberal that you believe that people who are killing American citizens everyday, in the name of "they just come here to work and feed their families" then you should travel to the homeland of those persons and assist them there. We have had enough in America of trying to care for the world, when is it our turn?
Who is going to pay for my healthcare bill, while the illegal alien get's free care? Who is going to pay for my children's education, while the illegal alien child get's free education? What about my job, that is now being done by an illegal immigrant and I can't even get welfare that I have paid into the system for, for 40 years?
This has nothing to do with bashing, or racisim, trust me, we know what racisim looks like in America, and this is far from it! Talk to the blacks, they can tell you what racisim looks like. They can tell you some American horror stories!
Unfortunately, blacks can still tell you stories in 2008, so if you think that America is ready to deal with yet another race of people who don't even belong here, you have got another thing coming.
Regarding surplus taxes, there are none. What ever you may call a surplus taking care of an entire Country, would be news to us.
We have had it in America. We have given our give away! We can't sustain this invasion any further. Not to mention what is going to happen with chain migration and birthright citizenship. People are taking cold hearted advantage of our kindness and our weakness. Enough, if our government tries to give amnesty to anyone, that will be a problem. We have said no amnesty, we want every illegal immigrant and the anchor they have birthed in our country since 1986 to please deport and take your illegal immigrant children with you. They are not citizens of this country, but the country of their mothers and fathers. There will come a time when the Constitution will be adheared to, that time is coming soon. This is truly unfortunate.
Caring Human on Dec 02, 2008 at 07:25:11 said:
Illegal immigrants paying more taxes than you think
-->Eight million illegals pay Social Security, Medicare and income taxes. Denying public services to people who pay their taxes is an affront to America’s bedrock belief in fairness. But many “pull-up-the-drawbridge” politicians want to do just that when it comes to illegal immigrants.
The fact that illegal immigrants pay taxes at all will come as news to many Americans. A stunning twothirds of illegal immigrants pay Medicare, Social Security and personal income taxes.
Yet, nativists like Congressman Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., have popularized the notion that illegal aliens are a colossal drain on the nation’s hospitals, schools and welfare programs — consuming services that they don’t pay for.
In reality, the 1996 welfare reform bill disqualified illegal immigrants from nearly all meanstested government programs including food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid and Medicare-funded hospitalization.
The only services that illegals can still get are emergency medical care and K-12 education. Nevertheless, Tancredo and his ilk pushed a bill through the House criminalizing all aid to illegal aliens — even private acts of charity by priests, nurses and social workers.
Potentially, any soup kitchen that offers so much as a free lunch to an illegal could face up to five years in prison and seizure of assets. The Senate bill that recently collapsed would have tempered these draconian measures against private aid.
But no one — Democrat or Republican — seems to oppose the idea of withholding public services. Earlier this year, Congress passed a law that requires everyone who gets Medicaid — the government-funded health care program for the poor — to offer proof of U.S. citizenship so we can avoid “theft of these benefits by illegal aliens,” as Rep. Charlie Norwood, R-Ga., puts it. But, immigrants aren’t flocking to the United States to mooch off the government.
According to a study by the Urban Institute, the 1996 welfare reform effort dramatically reduced the use of welfare by undocumented immigrant households, exactly as intended. And another vital thing happened in 1996: the Internal Revenue Service began issuing identification numbers to enable illegal immigrants who don’t have Social Security numbers to file taxes.
One might have imagined that those fearing deportation or confronting the prospect of paying for their safety net through their own meager wages would take a pass on the IRS’ scheme. Not so. Close to 8 million of the 12 million or so illegal aliens in the country today file personal income taxes using these numbers, contributing billions to federal coffers.
No doubt they hope that this will one day help them acquire legal status — a plaintive expression of their desire to play by the rules and come out of the shadows. What’s more, aliens who are not self-employed have Social Security and Medicare taxes automatically withheld from their paychecks.
Since undocumented workers have only fake numbers, they’ll never be able to collect the benefits these taxes are meant to pay for. Last year, the revenues from these fake numbers — that the Social Security administration stashes in the “earnings suspense file” — added up to 10 percent of the Social Security surplus.
The file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year. Beyond federal taxes, all illegals automatically pay state sales taxes that contribute toward the upkeep of public facilities such as roads that they use, and property taxes through their rent that contribute toward the schooling of their children.
The non-partisan National Research Council found that when the taxes paid by the children of low-skilled immigrant families — most of whom are illegal — are factored in, they contribute on average $80,000 more to federal coffers than they consume. Yes, many illegal migrants impose a strain on border communities on whose doorstep they first arrive, broke and unemployed.
To solve this problem equitably, these communities ought to receive the surplus taxes that federal government collects from immigrants. But the real reason border communities are strained is the lack of a guest worker program.
Such a program would match willing workers with willing employers in advance so that they wouldn’t be stuck for long periods where they disembark while searching for jobs. The cost of undocumented aliens is an issue that immigrant bashers have created to whip up indignation against people they don’t want here in the first place.
With the Senate having just returned from yet another vacation and promising to revisit the stalled immigration bill, politicians ought to set the record straight: Illegals are not milking the government. If anything, it is the other way around.