President Obama's decision to stop deporting some young illegal immigrants is a small but significant act of pragmatic common sense in a policy arena that has long abandoned rationality for symbolism and emotion. According to New York Times reporters Julia Preston and John H. Cushman Jr.:
Under the change, the Department of Homeland Security will no longer initiate the deportation of illegal immigrants who came to the United States before age 16, have lived here for at least five years, and are in school, are high school graduates or are military veterans in good standing. The immigrants must also be under 30 and have clean criminal records.
While no one knows how many people are affected by the President's Executive Order, estimates range from 800,000 to 1.4 million. We also do not know the number of illegal immigrants living in the United States, but most estimates exceed 10 million. The Obama Administration has already deported over a million illegal immigrants, but no one thinks these deportations are effective public policies. If someone figured out a way to sneak across the border once, why does anyone seriously think they can't figure it out a second time? It is impossible to completely seal a national border.
Which leads to our need for a reality check. Why do people come to America? My guess is they come for the same reason they always have come: for a better life than the one they have where they live. About fifty years ago, John F. Kennedy wrote a short book entitled A Nation of Immigrants. President Kennedy discussed the importance of immigration in shaping America's character. The fact is, with the exception of a small number of Native Americans, most of us do not have to go very far back to trace our family to some other part of this planet. America remains a nation of immigrants. My grandparents came here less than a century ago from Eastern Europe and Russia. I'm told they came in legally, but the laws and methods of travel and enforcement were different back then. My grandparents came here for the same reason today's immigrants come -- to build a better life.
That drive is strong and is difficult to stop. If economic opportunity and political stability were equal around the world, most people would not travel thousands of miles to settle in another country. The immigrant life is hard and it takes great courage to leave a familiar place to move to someplace new. As Kennedy pointed out in his book, immigrants have always faced bias and mistreatment at the hands of those who arrived before they did. My grandparents faced bias and anti-Semitism in America, but it was far less dangerous than the version they dealt with in Poland and Russia. They found it possible to work, buy homes and raise families in relative security and safety in America. My parents, uncles and aunts, cousins and siblings all know (and those deceased knew) that their lives and their lifestyles were made possible by our grandparents' courage and drive. And I know too. America's safety and opportunity attracts people today, as does our tradition of welcoming immigrants (or at least our habit of being more open to the idea than other countries). What has changed since my grandparents arrived are the laws governing who is allowed to come. Clearly, those laws are not working. Why?
One reason is that employers like to hire immigrant labor. Immigrants will do work that the rest of us are unwilling to do at the price that employers are willing to pay. Immigrants know that even if they come to America illegally they will be able to find work. One might expect that 8 percent unemployment would deter immigrants and reduce their presence in the job market, but there is little evidence this has happened. Perhaps fewer are coming to America, but few are leaving. So the push to immigrate remains, as does the pull of low-paying but steady work. People from places with death squads, drug wars and political disorder seek the safety and order of a nation of laws.
Despite these facts we see sanctimonious politicos bellowing about the need to maintain the sanctity of the law. While I mistrust the nativist motives behind some of those making this argument, I have sympathy for it as well. The laws must be enforced. Our safety and security depend on it. But stupid and impractical laws must be changed. How are we going to deport 10 million people? And why would we want to deport these productive, hard-working immigrants? Why should these people suffer from the fact that our immigration laws did not match the economic reality that provided them with employment?
As we learned last week, there is still a strong political force arguing that immigration laws must be enforced. These folks oppose "amnesty" and want to deport illegal immigrants. Until last week, a teenager, brought here when she was four and trying to go to college was told she was not an American and was deported. With the stroke of a pen, the president has changed that: at least for a little while. This is an important step forward in dealing with a deeply flawed law that is stuck in Washington gridlock. The president came to understand that children who grew up in this country were the innocent victims of our dysfunctional federal government. The response was a careful, short term and limited fix that provided immediate relief and refocused attention on this critical issue.
The president is being criticized for taking such an obvious and brazenly political action the midst of an election year. Swing states such as Colorado, Florida, Nevada and Virginia have growing Hispanic populations and moves such as this can swing a swing state toward the president's column. What a shock to find one of the nation's most skilled and successful politicians making an overtly political move during an election year. With gay marriage and immigration reform Obama is simultaneously appealing to key constituencies and managing to take our collective mind off the economy. That's one way to fight millions of dollars of Super PAC money. I wonder what's next?
The political nature of this move is evidence of the growing importance of the Hispanic vote and the continued centrality of immigration and diversity to our national identity. In most countries of the world, a foreigner's family remains foreign for many generations, if not forever. America is different. As President Kennedy understood a half century ago, our openness to people from other nations is a source of our strength. The economics of the 21st century will be dominated by brain-based economies that can develop and utilize new technologies. America's openness to talent from all corners of the globe, its continued investment in science and engineering, its relative safety and its free market provide the potential for continued economic strength. We need to make sure that talented scientists continue to move here and that those living in America stay here. But idiotic immigration laws, cuts in federal funding for science and engineering, and ideological gridlock in Washington threaten these national assets.
With a brilliantly crafted and highly political exercise of executive power, President Obama has changed the terms of the immigration debate. By focusing on innocent children, brought here before they were legally responsible for their own actions, he removes some of the stigma of illegality from their presence in America. But more importantly, he resets the immigration debate in human terms. The media is filled with stories of sympathetic young people who will benefit from this new policy. President Obama helped provide a human face to the issue of immigration reform. While it is true he could have done the same things three years ago, the relatively muted Republican response to his move benefited from the electoral math of 2012. It is that same math that could finally bring much-needed reforms to our immigration laws. Let's hope so.
Follow Steven Cohen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/earthinstitute
Lyle Denniston: Constitution Check: Can the Courts Overturn New Deportation Reprieve?
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
We have our own true "American" children suffering with abuse and often not enough to eat.
It's not that we frown upon immigration however we do not welcome Irish, Russians and other nationalities with the same "open arm” policies. I think focusing on children is just plain manipulation.
Oh yeah by the way coincidentally it’s an election year.
Copy of previous post below!
These individuals do not care to learn English as my immigrant relatives did.
They have lived in California for the past 30 years, own multiple properties as stated above, and refuse to comply with the laws of the land.
The landlord's son, attacked me and made a state expressing racial hatred for me and sexual hatred - he hates white people.
The fact is that the 20 million illegals do not want to integrate or join the United States - they want to be Mexican in America - that is - do not speak English, do not read English, watch Spanish only Television which is free, and shun anyone who is not Latin.
This is what our great democracy has created Mexican Supremacists and Chinese Supremacist - anti American and hatred against persons of European descent
If we do not enforce the limits we set, that is unlimited immigration which is an outdated idea for a country of 313,717,597 with a net gain of one person every 13 seconds:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html
It's not just unsustainable, but immoral. Maybe in a fantasy world without limits but in the real world we can't take every person who would like to come here. The U.S. is already in ecological overshoot even if future immigration were zero. Every time a person moves from a lower ecological footprint country to a higher ecological footprint country (like ours), the world eco-footprint rises further into overshoot. Thus, immigration to the U.S. exacerbates not just our problem, but the world's. Opening our doors discourages the most overpopulated countries who need to dump their excess population from ever changing their unsustainable ways. So while it would be nice if everyone who would like to live in the U.S. could, that would not just be impractical but unethical considering the environmental consequences. This is the moral case not to cause harm through immigration.
This was implied that he did this to circumvent Congress. Not correct. In fact, the change is an exercise of prosecutorial discretion that is consistent with the current law and has decades of precedent. "Conservative Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, a supporter of Republican Mitt Romney, brushed off the notionthat the immigration policy change occurred via executive order. Shurtleff noted that this decision was not made via executive order and that the administration has the discretion to decide whom to prosecute.
"Law enforcement makes decisions based on the resources available to them -- until Congress acts, we'll be left with too many people to deport," Shurtleff said. "The administration is saying, 'Here's a group we could be spending our resources going after, but why? They're Americans, they see themselves as Americans, they love this country.'" [The Washington Post, The Plum Line, 6/15/12]
The hope is that Congress will get busy pass not only real immigration laws that are sound and reasonable, and will get busy and pass a jobs bill. They are spending most of their time on passing bills that ban abortion, defund Planned Parenthood, etc., instead of doing the people's real work.
Here's what Obama himself said BEFORE he acted:
"Well, the truth of the matter is that we have exercised as much administrative discretion as we can."
"I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. We are doing everything we can administratively. But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce."
Today, my landlord pulled - I don't speak or read English while prohibiting me from installing my internet cable from a vendor. She is manipulative and a liar.
These individuals do not care to learn English as my immigrant relatives did.
They have lived in California for the past 30 years, own multiple properties as stated above, and refuse to comply with the laws of the land.
The landlord's son, attacked me and made a state expressing racial hatred for me and sexual hatred - he hates white people and I am a F**&^% B**@$.
The fact is that the 20 million illegals do not want to integrate or join the United States - they want to be Mexican in America - that is - do not speak English, do not read English, watch Spanish only Television which is free, and shun anyone who is not Latin.
This is what our great democracy has created Mexican Supremacists and Chinese Supremacist - anti American and hatred against persons of European descent - Caucasian.
Maybe we need immigration reform, but we certainly don’t need it by “executive order”. I called California’s Senator Boxer’s office and the staffer said that the President was “prioritizing” his enforcement of the law. I think this is called “selective” enforcement. I spent sometime looking through the US Constitution and could find nowhere any reference to “prioritizing” enforcement of the law, any law.
Article 2, Section 3 of the US Constitution under “Duties of the President” states “HE (The President) SHALL TAKE CARE THAT THE LAWS BE FAITHFULLY EXECUTED”, “Faithfully Executed”, not selectively executed, or not prioritized. The President, by executive order, is not “faithfully executing” the law, he is changing it and this is not in his purview according the words of the Constitution. Only Congress can do this.
“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order — that’s just not the case. Because there are laws on the books, that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the laws. The Executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement the laws, and then the Judiciary has to interpret the laws. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system, that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.” President Obama before Univision.
I'm laughing at it all.
How about it Mr Cohen, care to make a donation to the Dreamers who have gotten free everything....
Yeah, I thought not....
Get a clue Mr. Cohen, the reason for the failure of the Mexicans to attempt to become legal is not money - they buy houses and boats and cars and what ever else they can buy - it is because
they do not want to be American. They want to be Spanish speaking Mexicans forever. They do not join Americans - they shop at their spanish only shops, and they speak Spanish even if they have been living in the country for decades.
And they harass everyone who is not Mexican or Spanish speaking when those individuals come in proximity to where they live - or ghettoize.
I have reversed all good feelings for Mexicans and now view their conduct as contemptuous for the country, the US that gives them everything - opportunities, bank accounts, clean water, police services, libraries, education, and medical services.
We pay through the nose for their hatred.