| |
| |
 |
|
Immigrants and others that
support reform of immigration
legislation gather in Union
Square in New York.
Demonstrators demanding a path
to citizenship for an estimated
12 million undocumented
immigrants hope nationwide
marches will spur Congress to
act above
the political landscape.
|
|
|
Has the Political Landscape
Shifted Enough to Change the
Dynamics of Immigration Reform?
LOS ANGELES (By Tamar Jacoby, LAT)
May 8, 2009
— Immigration reform — you may think
you've seen this movie before, too
many times already. You know the
arguments. You dread the
polarization. And you doubt Congress
can do any better at making the
compromises needed to fix the
system.
But with the Obama White House
rekindling the conversation about
immigration, skeptics ought to think
again. None of the problems have
gone away, after all. Neither the
economic downturn nor enhanced
enforcement has driven 12 million
undocumented immigrants to leave the
country. Enforcement is still far
from effective, either on the border
or in the workplace. And even in a
recession, we still seem to need
foreign workers, especially at the
bottom of the economy.
But other things have changed since
2006 and 2007, when the nation last
wrangled so bitterly over
immigration. And although the new
landscape hardly guarantees success
— immigration is never an easy
issue, and some of what has changed
will make it harder to pass reform —
it's going to be a different debate
this year.
The most prominent feature of the
new landscape is the recession,
which at first blush makes reform
more difficult. With unemployment
still rising, many Americans doubt
we need foreign workers. Voters are
thinking about themselves first.
They have no patience for other
people's problems. And, as always
when times are hard, there's a
danger populist resentments
will curdle into xenophobia,
creating pressure to seal the border
rather than craft a way for
newcomers to come here to work
legally.
But so far, the recession isn't
having that effect. Journalists and
employers report not even
unemployed Americans seem to want to
do farm work or day-labor jobs, at
least not yet. Many fewer foreigners
are coming to the U.S. in search of
work: They know there are fewer jobs
available. And the reduced flow
seems to be easing American
anxieties somewhat.
The difference showed up first in
state legislatures, where
immigration has been far less of an
issue this year than last, perhaps
because lawmakers have bigger things
to worry about, like balancing their
state budgets. And last month, the
country's two big labor federations
— the AFL-CIO and Change to Win —
came out strongly in favor of
immigration reform, arguing it
would help native-born workers, even
in a downturn, by enhancing
immigrants' power to bargain with
employers and reducing unfair
competition with Americans.
Bottom line: No doubt the recession
will color the immigration debate to
some degree — but perhaps less than
many expect.
The political landscape has also
changed. The most obvious and
dramatic shift is the new political
power of Hispanics. According to one
estimate, nearly 11 million
Hispanics voted in 2008, compared
with 7.6 million in 2004. They
turned at least four states from red
to blue.
And there's no mistaking the new
mood: Many Hispanic voters have come
to see immigration as a litmus test.
Though not necessarily their first
priority, it has become a threshold
indicator for judging politicians:
"Does he or she like people who look
like us, or not?" Democrats have
gotten this message loud and clear,
and many are embracing immigration
reform as a potential wedge issue.
But this attitude could hurt reform
as much as it helps. Some Democrats
will be afraid to get out ahead of
anti-immigrant voters. And those
seeking to use immigration for
partisan advantage may prefer a
long, polarized standoff to a
compromise solution. A partisan
Democratic push could also harden
attitudes among Republicans, and
entrenched partisanship on both
sides could delay reform for years
to come.
New arguments within the immigration
reform movement will also complicate
the debate this time around. It's a
bigger tent than it used to be — a
stronger army fighting for an
overhaul. But this also makes it
harder for all the troops to agree
on what's needed in a bill.
Advocates on the left now include
not just Hispanic voters and unions
divided in 2006 and 2007, and often
an obstacle to reform, but also a
growing portion of Obama's
progressive base. Meanwhile, on the
center-right, employers who hire
immigrants are engaging, finding the
courage to speak up about how they
need foreign workers.
The problem: Left and right not only
frame their arguments differently,
they also disagree on matters of
substance. Most significantly,
unions question whether the country
needs reform that creates more visas
for immigrant workers to enter the
country in the future, while
employers who hire foreigners say
they can't sustain their businesses
without them.
The question for the months ahead:
Will these differences undo the
reform movement, or will left and
right find ways to compromise,
broadening their base and expanding
their power?
Here's the other big question: How
strong are the anti-immigrant
activists who dominated the debate
last time — talk radio and CNN's Lou
Dobbs and their inflamed, angry
followers. In fact, as poll after
poll showed, these naysayers
represented a relatively small
segment of Americans — no more than
20% to 25%. But they were loud and
well-organized and they managed to
generate doubts about reform among a
much larger group of uncertain,
ambivalent voters.
Dobbs and former Colorado
congressman Tom Tancredo are already
ratcheting up their anti-immigrant
rhetoric and the recession may help
them. But it's also possible things
will play out differently, that some
of the far-right's anger is spent,
and the doubts won't catch on
as they did last time among the
broader public. Voters are anxious
and self-absorbed, but as Obama's
election and continued popularity
show, voters want things fixed. They
want Washington to act boldly, to
tackle hard problems, to make the
compromises necessary to pass
fundamental reforms. And immigration
may well benefit from the new
can-do, reformist mood.
Will it be immigration deja vu in
2009? It could be — the same old
stale debate or an equally
uncompromising one. But enough has
already changed that it could be
different this time around. Who
knows, this time, we as a nation
might even get to "yes."
|
|
|
|
|