He misrepresents the policies and accomplishments of his immigration agencies and their leaders, in order to make it appear that they are tough on immigration enforcement, and to support his claim that it is time to enact the policies he supports, which include increases in legal immigration and an amnesty for illegal immigrants. However, the President clearly does not want to sound so tough as to alienate some of his core supporters who favor more lenient policies. He tries to pre-empt criticism of his administration¹s performance by accusing those skeptics of ³moving the goal posts² and making unreasonable demands. It should not be surprising that this speech fell flat, and failed to convince most Americans, either that illegal immigration is under control or that it would be a good time to increase immigration and legalize the huge population of illegal immigrants.
more...since it’s virtually impossible that Congress will enact any immigration reform or even the DREAM Act until 2013 at the very earliest. After the November, 2012 election we will probably know whether there is a realistic possibility of such reform before 2015.
more...In terms of understanding the current problems around immigration, the President’s speech was not very helpful, in that it was essentially a collection of platitudes that offered little in terms of ideas for really moving forward on this topic. He spoke in El Paso, so he was clearly trying to send a message to the Latino community, but his need to also demonstrate that the border has been strengthened meant that the message was mixed at best, and so it is not clear if it was even successful as a political act.
It is instructive that Mexico is not mentioned until paragraph 22. Perhaps the most disappointing is that President Obama relies in part on conflating “high value-added” immigration (i.e. the highly educated and/or those with significant monetary means) with the type of immigrants who form the bulk of the undocumented immigrants. While understandable if the object is to increase support for immigration, it is unfortunate because it takes away clarity from the possible solutions. For example, he only ever indirectly mentions demand in the US economy for these workers (paragraph 41), and to the extent that he mentions employers, the implicit assumption is that they are employing these immigrants because they are unscrupulous and wish to exploit their workers. While I have no doubt that this type of employers exist, we should be careful in thinking that this is the only reason businesses hire the undocumented.
THE CONTEXT
The nation’s immigration system is in urgent need of reform that restores dignity and the rule of law and rejects a status quo that does neither. Congressional failure to enact reform has led to piecemeal measures that are introducing greater chaos into an already broken system, particularly those enacted at the state and local levels, which lack jurisdiction over immigration. Alarmingly, such measures, combined with the toxic tone of the immigration debate, have also fomented an environment of intolerance against immigrants, regardless of immigration status, and against Hispanics in general, making this a defining civil rights issue for the Latino community.
The enactment of piecemeal laws that deal with immigration has been ineffective in reducing the size of the undocumented population. Now forced more deeply into the shadows, this population is more susceptible to exploitation by unscrupulous employers to the detriment of all workers. While dysfunctional legal immigration policies keep families apart and legal workers out, heavy handed enforcement operations have terrorized communities and led to the unlawful detention of legal immigrants and citizens.
It is time for the federal government to accept its responsibility and exercise leadership to fix these failed policies. The country needs real solutions that are aligned with America s best values and traditions.
THE SOLUTION
In reality, there is much consensus around solutions to the immigration issue. Poll after poll demonstrates that the American public is in a much more pragmatic place than Congress has been on this issue. This has been corroborated further in recent election cycles, which showed that voters rejected leading anti-immigrant candidates. Voters support a comprehensive overhaul of our broken system that restores the rule of law and includes legalization and smart enforcement.
NCLR (National Council of La Raza) supports a workable and humane immigration system that promotes legality, serves the national interest, and upholds the Constitution and our values. To achieve those goals, reform must:
* Restore the rule of law through a two-pronged approach that includes earned legalization and sensible enforcement. Neither of these measures alone can restore order to the system.
* Preserve the rule of law by creating workable legal immigration channels that uphold family unity and protect workers rights.
* Strengthen the fabric of America by adopting proactive measures that advance the successful integration of new immigrants.
The sense of urgency and possibility for real change in immigration are stronger than ever. A constructive debate and smart solutions are needed to move the country forward. For more information on NCLR s work on immigration, visit http://www.nclr.org/immigration .
Do restrictive measures at the local level repel immigrants from local communities, above and beyond the effects of the economy? This is a question where “pick and choose” anecdotes [and very little rigorous evidence] from disparate sides of immigration debates have dominated. NCLR’s position statement above goes a long way at revisiting claims that immigrants initiatively and automatically flee harsh political climates.
more...