How
did we get from there to here?
The past two years has witnessed an extraordinary set of developments in the
Following his re-election, President George W. Bush makes comprehensive
immigration reform a top priority for his second term. In December 2005, and in
response to talk radio, talk TV, and the Minutemen, House leaders turn their
backs on an increasingly unpopular President and pass the harshest immigration
bill in 80 years. In the spring of 2006, millions of immigrants and their
allies take to the streets in protest. In an Oval Office address, the President
declares that the time has come to get control over the nation’s borders by
combining tough enforcement with a realistic framework for legal immigration.
In a rare display of bipartisan problem-solving, a comprehensive immigration
reform bill passes the Senate that combines tough border and workplace
enforcement measures with more worker and family visas and a path to
citizenship for most undocumented immigrants in the
And
then, in an extraordinary display of cynical election-year calculation
(miscalculation?), House leaders sidestep a conference committee with the
Senate, mock the bipartisan Senate bill by labeling it the “Reid-Kennedy bill,”
and take their base-turnout strategy on a summer road show of “faux hearings.”
Upon returning to Washington for the last month of pre-election legislative
action, the House Republican leadership pieces together a set of sweeping
legislative measures straight out of their previously-passed enforcement-only
bill, has them approved on the House floor (again), and attempts to impose its
will on the Senate by adding them to must-pass appropriations measures.
Thanks
to determined opposition from members on both sides of the aisle, cooler heads
prevail and stop most of the sweeping House measures from becoming law.
Senators Specter (R-PA), Gregg (R-NH), and Warner (R-VA), all of whom supported
the comprehensive Senate immigration bill, refuse to yield to aggressive
backroom attempts by House leaders to add the anti-immigrant bills to spending
measures. Senators McCain (R-AZ), Graham (R-SC), Martinez (R-FL), Hagel (R-NE), Brownback (R-KS), and Craig (R-ID) among
others, continue to speak out forcefully for comprehensive reform as the only
way to truly fix the problem. And just as heroically, Senators Reid (D-NV),
Kennedy (D-MA), Salazar (D-CO), Feinstein (D-CA), Durbin (D-IL), Lieberman
(D-CT), and Obama (D-IL), among others, maintain
their steadfast support for comprehensive reform in the face of a crass
pre-election attempt to paint Democrats as “soft on illegal immigration.”
This
spirit of bipartisanship is mostly absent in the House, but Democratic House
leaders such as Minority Leader Pelosi (D-CA), Minority Whip Hoyer (D-MD),
members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Congressional Black Caucus,
Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, and many others, add their voices
to those who rightly denounce the House tactics as the triumph of bad politics
over good policy. Courageous Republican voices, such as Jim Kolbe (R-AZ), Jeff
Flake (R-AZ), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL), as well as others, bravely make the
case for a comprehensive approach.
In
the end, Congress appropriates more money for border security, approves a
measure to make tunnel-building illegal, and in its highest profile
“accomplishment,” authorizes the construction of 700 miles of fencing along our
2,000 mile border with
Is
this the best we can do?
This
is what passes for political leadership? Refuse to convene a conference
committee to negotiate a far-reaching reform on a pressing policy priority? A
political road show aimed at throwing red meat to a minority of voters in hopes
that they get angry enough to show up in November? Playing “gotcha” politics
anchored in cynical disregard for the intelligence of American voters? A fence to nowhere with funds from nowhere? Is the failure
to deliver workable reform one of the reasons Congress’ approval rating is so
low?
What’s
next?
What’s
next is the election. And the election results will have a considerable impact
on future prospects for comprehensive immigration reform.
If
House Republicans retain or expand their current majority and conclude that
their hard line on immigration helped them do so, one suspects
that Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) will continue to be the face of the House
Republican agenda on immigration issues. If House Republicans lose numerous
seats or their majority, then prospects for comprehensive immigration reform
will improve significantly. We believe there has been and will be a bipartisan
majority for workable comprehensive reform in the House, no matter which party
is in the majority. The main question is whether the leadership will allow this
majority to work its will.
Whether
the Senate is led by Republicans or Democrats, the upper chamber has already
proven its ability to enact architecturally-sound comprehensive reform. The
challenge for the Senate will be to improve on its 2006 bill so that it not
only passes with strong bipartisan support, but works once implemented.
What
about a lame duck session of Congress? Some proponents of comprehensive
immigration reform are holding out hope that something good might happen when
Congress returns the week after Election Day. We would be pleased to be proved
wrong, but we are not optimistic. After all, what are the chances the House
Republican leadership, after spending six months trashing comprehensive
immigration reform, will come back in November and enact comprehensive
immigration reform?
In
fact, the more likely scenario is that House leaders will return determined to
attach some or all of the sweeping enforcement-only measures rebuffed in
September to must-pass appropriations measures. We hope and expect our allies
in both parties and in both chambers will continue to resist this backdoor
attempt to enact measures that will only serve to make our broken immigration
system more dysfunctional.
What’s
needed?
We
believe that the immigration debate will continue to roil American politics and
American communities, and that voters will become more insistent that our
leaders lead. We believe they will become more demanding that Congress and the
President size up problems in their full dimensions so that our responses are
realistic and workable. We believe they will intensify their call on Congress
to solve complex problems like the broken immigration system with
comprehensive, common-sense, bipartisan solutions—instead of the partisan
polarization and paralysis we have today.
In
the immigration debate, this would mean that we stop ignoring the facts of
life. We can no longer ignore the fact that the
We look forward to a continuing debate over how to reform our immigration laws
so that we regain control of our borders, strengthen our economy, reunite
families, level the playing field in the workplace, protect civil rights, and
renew our nation’s commitment to citizenship. We sincerely believe that
replacing the broken status quo with a 21st century regulatory system that
works is a matter of “when,” not “if.” We are confident that the next Congress
will move beyond fences and slogans to fixes and solutions.
Frank Sharry is the Executive Director of the
National Immigration Forum, a non-profit, non-partisan pro-immigration advocacy
group.