Recently in U.S. Electoral Politics Category
Despite the "all or nothing" rhetoric with which Democrats in Congress have shot down proposed piecemeal reforms like the DREAM Act in defense of comprehensive immigration reform, Democrats are perfectly ok with passing piecemeal reforms--as long as they ramp up enforcement and deliver nothing of value to the immigrant community. On Thursday, Senate Democrats introduced a $600 billion million border enforcement bill that will further militarize the border while getting nothing in return for the immigrant community. America's Voice chided Democrats for continuing "to play a losing game of catch-up to politicians like Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio."
Republicans like John McCain are thrilled that Democrats are doing their work for them to punish immigrants until they leave on their own, a policy known as "enforcement through attrition":
"Although, there is a great deal more to be done, I believe today Democrats finally put good policy over politics and agreed we must secure our border first," McCain said in a statement.
With strong Republican support, the bill was quickly approved by the Senate. Democrats for a long time now have been good at pretending to be allies of the immigrant community to court the Latin@ vote, but bad at actually delivering any legislation that does more than further penalize the immigrant community.
The Mexican newspaper El Universal reported that Senator Schumer rejected attempts to attach the DREAM Act and AgJobs to the border enforcement bill. (Hat tip Jose Franco of the DREAM Act 21.) Deepak Barghava of the Center for Community Change speculated in a Politico article that introduction of the bill had been a failed attempt by Democrats at a bluff, but that Republicans "ate the Democrats' lunch," and voted for the bill even though Schumer had only introduced it a few hours before the vote. Politico reported that unnamed immigrant rights advocates said that passing a stand-alone border bill eliminated a bargaining chip for Democrats to pass comprehensive immigration reform. If so, this was a major tactical error by Schumer and shows how thoroughly outclassed he is by GOP Senators when it comes to immigration policy.
This is the latest in a string of piecemeal enforcement backed by Democrats without any expectation of any pro-migrant reform in return. Immigration Impact reported recently that the Democrats have now enacted the majority of the enforcement pieces of the failed 2007 comprehensive reform bill, while getting nothing in return for the immigrant community. Democrats have been the biggest facilitators of the current enforcement-only immigration policy regime, caving time after time to nativists in the GOP even though Democrats hold large majorities in both houses of Congress. These are not allies, they are "frenemies," friends to your face who stab you in the back as soon as you turn around.
If CCC and other national immigrant advocacy organizations are unhappy with Democrats right now, they have only themselves to blame for repeatedly enabling Democratic frenemies, from giving Deporter-in-Chief Obama an uncontested platform to deceive the immigrant community at the March 21 immigrant rights rally in Washington, D.C., to buying into Rahm Emanuel's poll-tested "tough on immigrants" talking points that reinforce conservative frames on immigration. Aside from recent movement from America's Voice to support standalone DREAM Act and challenge the Democrats, to me it's still an open question: Will D.C.-based immigrant rights organizations ever hold Democrats accountable for selling out the immigrant community?
And the next big question with this latest installment of enforcement-only legislation coming from Democrats in the Senate: Will the Congressional Hispanic Caucus follow the Senate's lead and support piecemeal enforcement-only reform while continuing to hold pro-migrant piecemeal legislation like the DREAM Act hostage to a nonexistent CIR bill?
So who are these Democratic frenemies, and what do they have against immigrants? Here is a short primer:
A striking difference between yesterday's May 1 immigrant rights rally in Washington, D.C., and the rally on the National Mall on March 21 was the message. Another was the mood.
The speakers on March 21 included advocates, immigrants, and a fair number of politicians. President Obama even spoke in a recorded message about his sorrow for the families that are torn apart by the broken immigration system. The crowd was silent during his message and gave him a massive cheer when it was done. The mood that day was exuberant and hopeful.
The mood at yesterday's May 1 rally in D.C. was one of anger and betrayal. Speakers talked about President Obama's broken promises, his failure to promote immigration reform, and his continued support for programs like 287(g) and InSecure Communities that lead to racial profiling by local law enforcement. They talked about the 400,000 people deported in Obama's first year of office, more than any single year of the Bush administration. Children spoke of their parents currently in the process of being deported by President Obama, and they asked him not to break up their families.
The immigrant community is starting to realize that, when it comes to immigration policy, President Obama and the Senate Democrats have been saying one thing and doing another. They express regret for family separation, for the workers who have paid into the tax base for decades but still face deportation, and for the DREAM Act students brought here as infants who live under the shadow of exile. But through their actions, they wholly support the status quo enforcement-only immigration system.
Obama pro-migrant Fail: President George W. Bush's second term began with 246,000 deportations a year. Under Obama, the number is closer to 400,000.
Obama honesty Fail: "I think it's time for a President who won't walk away from something as important as comprehensive reform when it becomes politically unpopular."
DHS use of tax dollars Fail: Boston CBP official employs undocumented housekeeper, neighbor rats her out, DHS puts a wire on the housekeeper and records official telling her "You can't leave. Don't leave . . . 'Cause once you leave, you will never come back,'' official gets felony conviction for "encouraging or enticing" housekeeper to stay in U.S.
Dream Act Win: AFL-CIO, USSA, NEA, AFT, MALDEF sponsor press conference in support of the Dream Act.
Pass the Dream Act. Pass it now!
"Democrats, don't count on us again if we can't count on you now."
From Nezua, 3/21/10, Washington, D.C. Read his recap of the march last Sunday, he says what I would like to say but didn't know how.
The Republicans are celebrating their victory in New Jersey and there may be reason for pro-migrant supporters to celebrate as well. Chris Christie is not your standard Republican. In fact he has spent many years fighting Morristown, New Jersey mayor Donald Cresitello on Cresitello's desire to institute 287g. Cresitello actually had quite a distaste for Christie due to his constant push back on the 287g program. Prior to the election Cresitello stated about Christie:
I couldn't understand how a Republican could come out against a program to deport people who come here illegally and are accused of further illegalities. I figured the mayor might offer some insight. Chris Christie leans to the left of even some Democrats NJ.com
Last year Chris Christie stated in a town hall meeting:
"Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," Christie told more than 60 residents and town officials. "The whole phrase of 'illegal immigrant' connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime."
"Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," he added of entering the country illegally. "It is not."
Christie: Immigrants are not criminals - NJ.com
Barack Obama recently explained to Univision anchor Jorge Ramos why he used the term "illegal immigrants" in his health care speech, prompting Rep. Joe Wilson to yell at him (via Latina Lista): Well, keep in mind what I was addressing. I was addressing misinformation by the other side that was engaging in scare tactics. So I was essentially quoting them. I was saying, "for those of you who are saying that illegal immigrants are going to be covered under this plan," I said that's not true. Right? So I'm using their language because I was addressing the misinformation that they are providing. And I was speaking directly to an audience, the American people, who because of this misinformation, I think actually were very responding often times in a negative way.I don't buy it.
Obama's use of the term dovetails with his ally Senator Schumer's public repudiation of the term "undocumented immigrant" in favor of the tough-sounding but legally meaningless term "illegal immigrant." Obama's usage dates back to a decision in early 2008 to adopt right-wing framing on immigration in the hope of later passing a legalization bill.
If that was the plan, it hasn't worked very well so far. We have no idea when the Democrats will introduce an immigration bill. Schumer keeps pushing the date back. I've seen little evidence congressional Democrats or the administration are interested in expending political capital on immigration. They want it to be easy. They want something handed to them on a platter, with the work already done.
Meanwhile, opponents of immigration reform are deeply committed to their cause. Most so-called supporters are lukewarm at best about the issue, and right now I place Barack Obama in that category.
I picked this video up from Atrios, but it's a good intro for a pitch to sign this petition asking your Congressional reps to support ACORN and the low-income communities ACORN serves instead of cowering before Glenn Beck.
Someone please tell Congressional Democrats that it is unbecoming to prostrate oneself before a supreme weenie like Beck.
Clearly, ACORN needs to do some internal housekeeping, including training and screening its employees better. Workers at community-based organizations should give clients advice on how to comply with the law, not circumvent it. But Beck's promotion of O'Keefe's video is a transparent political hit piece. If the GOP gets any nonwhite votes at all in the next twenty years, it will be despite the best efforts of Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh.
The movement's moment could arrive as early as Tuesday when Durbin reintroduces the bill with co-sponsor Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.Dreamactivist.org is also beginning to sound the war drums through their change.org blog. Thousands have already been invited to call-in in support of the DREAM Act through facebook. The DREAM Act will be the first major migration policy battle of the 111th Congress and the Obama administration.Saundra Amrhein - St. Petersburg Times (21 March 2009)
As such, I thought it would be good to step back and reflect a little bit on the politics of the DREAM Act. I've already written a post advancing a comprehensive argument for passing the DREAM Act during these trying economic times. It was published on Alternet this morning. Today, I thought I'd reflect a little bit on the political climate the DREAM Act faces.
The Bush Administration continues to abuse immigration law to trump up the stories of security threats it wishes immigrants posed--voters are much more compliant when they believe they are facing imminent external threats. George Bush looks wistfully back at his post-9/11 approval ratings and dreams of a populace permanently under siege.
First, Lyglenson Lemorin, the Haitian-born bumbler who threatened national security with ninja stars (not joking), to whom the feds couldn't get any criminal charges to stick, was recently ordered deported by Immigration Judge Kenneth Hurewitz in Miami. No such thing as double jeopardy for immigrants!
Judge Hurewitz's asylum denial rate, incidentally: 89.4%. The national rate: 59.8%. Interesting that Hurewitz was the one selected to hear the case. Did I mention that Immigration Judges and DHS prosecuting attorneys are both part of the executive branch?
Hearing Virgil Goode rant against anchor babies months ago inspired me to write an indictment of nativist attacks on the 14th amendment of the U.S. constitution. I'm happy to report that another nativist Republican has lost his congressional seat to a more moderate Democrat. While Tom Perreillo is not the most pro-migrant candidate, I'll take him over Virgil Goode any day.Virgil Goode isn't alone in illustrating that nativism is a losing electoral strategy. An analysis by America's Voice (pdf) shows in "battleground" races for House and Senate seats pro-migration reform candidates beat nativists 19 out of 21 times.
So, not only is nativism a despicable electoral strategy, it's a stupid one too.
