Are Republicans and Democrats preparing to settle their decade-long blood feud over immigration policy?
Not quite, but amid the ongoing polemics and finger-pointing, some promising signs of constructive engagement - driven largely by the two parties' shared fears and anxieties over the growing Latino vote -- have emerged in recent weeks.
Consider, for example, the somewhat surprising embrace by Democrats of Republican Senator Marco Rubio's compromise proposal on the long contested "DREAM Act," a bill that, in its current form, would legalize some 2 million undocumented immigrants who migrated illegally with their parents while still minors.
In April, Rubio, who'd previously denounced the DREAM Act as an unacceptable "amnesty," floated a new proposal that would allow the Act's intended beneficiaries to stay in the country legally, but only on a temporary visa. They wouldn't get an automatic ticket to citizenship, as the Act in its current form would allow, and wouldn't be able to sponsor family members for legal residence, either. But they could still apply for a green card through regular U.S. immigration channels, which means, with a much longer wait, they'd likely end up as U.S. citizens anyway.
Largely caught off guard by Rubio's unexpected gambit, most Latino advocacy groups, as well as Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Senate majority leader Harry Reid initially responded with outrage. Reid argued that Rubio's proposal would turn the DREAM Act beneficiaries into "second class citizens" -- here to work but not to vote, and living in legal limbo, possibly for years. Others suggested that Rubio was merely trying to create a fig leaf of legitimacy for the GOP with Latinos, while boosting his prospects of becoming Romney's running mate in the fall.
But it quickly became clear that the matter wasn't so simple. The word on the street was that many Latinos didn't necessarily care about the DREAM Act's promise of automatic citizenship - even a temporary visa was preferable to the ever-present threat of deportation. And Rubio had already vetted his proposal with Latino grassroots activists in his home state of Florida -- a key November battleground, of course -- and had secured their tentative support. It wasn't long before Rep. Luis Gutierrez, who heads the immigration reform caucus in the House, was secretly sitting down with Rubio to discuss the outlines of a future deal, and pledging to work with a man that he'd once denounced as an "extremist."
Bipartisanship also appears to be breaking out on a second immigration reform front: whether to loosen current visa restrictions to allow more foreign-born scientists and engineers to obtain green cards more quickly. The measure would apply to prospective overseas workers but also to foreign-born students in American universities who account for an unusually high percentage of graduating PhDs. Like Dream Act supporters, U.S businesses like Microsoft have been pushing their visa reform measure for years, largely to no avail. But in recent weeks they've ramped up their efforts, winning fresh backing from Rubio and from two Democratic Senators, Mark Warner of Virginia and Chris Coons of Delaware
Even Obama, anxious to demonstrate progress on the jobs front, has begun promoting a bipartisan immigration bill that would reward foreign-born entrepreneurs with green cards if they demonstrate an ability to boost domestic employment. Various studies have documented that immigrants start businesses at a much higher-rate than native-born Americans - 50% higher, in some cases - and that many of those businesses have helped revitalize blighted neighborhoods in numerous metropolitan areas. In a recent op-ed, the bill's supporters, including the ever-present Rubio, pledged to work closely with Obama and the White House to secure its speedy passage.
What's motivating this sudden burst of bipartisan enthusiasm for immigration? Politics, of course, and a growing sense that Latino and non-Latino voters alike have become fed up with the current impasse. In a sign of just how frustrated some leading U.S. business and political figures have become, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, normally a close ally of Obama, last week blasted the President and both political parties in Congress, suggesting that they were "playing politics" with immigration rather than simply getting down to business. Bloomberg even went so far as to suggest that some states be "forced" to accept more immigrants while some like New York be allowed to set their own visa policies in the absence of federal action, a position that bears a striking resemblance to legislation that disenchanted Republicans in states like Utah passed last year.
All of these developments are suggestive of how quickly -- though still imperceptibly, it seems -- the political terrain on immigration may be shifting. All-but-certain GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who first seemed to demur when asked about Rubio's Dream Act compromise, has since quietly embraced it. And while Romney still trails Obama among Latinos by a wide margin, he's already started closing the gap, recently earning 27 percent support, nearly double the level he recorded in earlier polls, and already narrower than the margin that separated Obama and John McCain in 2008.
Some conservatives, including Rubio and former House speaker Newt Gingrich, who savaged Romney's immigration stance during the GOP primaries, are predicting that Latino concerns over the economy are likely to push them even closer to Romney, especially as the election grows near and the candidate continues to pivot tactically to the center.
Wishful thinking, perhaps, given the GOP base's persistent hostility to illegal immigrants and its continuing hold on Romney, but Obama and the Democrats can't afford to assume that Republicans will eventually revert to type. The U.S. Supreme Court is about to rule on the constitutionality of Arizona's tough immigration enforcement law at a time when the administration itself has already pushed deportations (mostly of Latinos) to record levels. If the Court, as expected, rules in Arizona's favor -- at least on the core issue of the state's right to aggressively enforce federal law -- there will be growing pressure on the White House to do even more on immigration, or risk alienating its base still further.
In fact, Rubio is now pushing the GOP to try to pass a modified DREAM Act and other immigration measures before November in the hopes of upstaging Obama and the Democrats. He's recently been joined in this push by New Mexico's Tea Party-backed governor Susana Martinez, a tough-talking former prosecutor who like Rubio has been prominently mentioned in recent months as a possible Romney running mate. Such a push, even for rhetorical purposes, could well turn the tables on Obama by making the GOP look like the principled "party of compromise," and the Democrats, still holding out for a more sweeping -- but politically unrealistic -- amnesty plan, as the stubborn "party of no."
Of course, looming over these calculations is the reality that the 2012 presidential race is tightening, not only nationally, but in Florida, Nevada, Colorado, and even Virginia, Latino-rich battleground states that Obama carried handily in 2008. The four states are facing huge economic problems that affect Latinos disproportionately, and while John McCain lost the Latino vote to Obama in 2008, experts say that a relatively weak Latino turn-out -- which, based on the latest Census data is likely -- will further shrink Obama's demographic advantage. Given how large the Latino vote is in these four states -- ranging from 14 percent in Nevada to 40 percent in New Mexico -- a relatively small Latino voting swing could easily decide the outcome.
All of this places the Obama administration, which is accustomed to brow-beating the GOP on immigration, in an exceedingly difficult position. The more Rubio & Co. keep pushing for legislative compromise, the more likely it will give Republicans -- and Romney -- a fresh opening with Latino voters. Whether this tactical GOP shift leads to enduring bipartisan compromise after the dust from the election settles remains to be seen, of course. But for immigrants who've grown accustomed to little more than blatant pandering by the two parties, any sign of substantive movement is surely good news. For Democrats more than Republicans, though, it could prove an unwelcome challenge.
Greta Van Susteren: The Senate Needs a Facilitator (and I Have an Idea Who)
 |
 |
|
| 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 |
Pressure building - more like panic! What I see is that the realization dawning on illegals is that they are on the tracks and the train they talked themselves into believing would never come, is in fact well on the way. They have committed the cardinal sin of marketing - believing their own BS.
Realizing that Obama is not that certain to get re-elected and seeing their precious cases against the likes of SB1070 starting to crumble in the face of rational thought, balanced application of law, reason and logic, all they have left is to turn up the volume and try to browbeat Obama into tossing them a 100 yard Hail Mary pass.
- Our laws are not particularly broken, especially with respect to illegal’s. They do not have permission to be here and remain liable for the full consequences of that.
- The majority of Americans are against illegal immigration.
- Obama really only has the power of veto - congress is where laws are made or changed.
- All of the expert opinions on executive orders merely outline that they actually amount to nothing more than what was outlined in the Morton memo - at best, temporary relief from prosecution.
As a practical matter, as even Newt Gingrich knows, there are people here for good. However, others aren't - in some cases, by their own choice (they all along planned to return home, a sometimes forgotten consideration).
I think what's disturbing to so many people, even the experts, is that there is already very substantive agreement on what the solution should look like, The last Democratic proposal for comprehensive immigration reform, which is still on the table, made enormous concessions to the GOP position. It basically accepted the entire logic of "enforcement first."
Illegal immigration has slowed to a trickle, partly because of the economy but also because the enforcement "noose" has tightened enormously under Obama. This is the ideal time to start making deals on the various elements of the immigration reform package.
Secondly: without effective enforcement of employment there is no reason to believe that the problem will not simply continue to roll unabated and all other issues are moot. Enforcement first is non-negotiable since our laws are not particularly broken.
What is broken is our clarity of vision. Double standards have let this situation develop and that is what we have to fix. What the illegals are in fact asking for is a huge favor. By trying to make this a rights issue and trying to tie their cause to everything under the sun, has substantially weakened their case, come across as arrogant and bigoted and more importantly burned up a lot of goodwill.
See and you thought that Democrats and Republicans could not agree on anything. They BOTH want to abuse lower income Americans.
The Democrats haven't a TANCREDO, BREWER, PEARCE......... counter person.
Until then, nothing the Right does will make them a significant option for Latin@s.
31 Republican Senators voting against Sonia Sotomayor caused SERIOUS damage, and ridiculing her TO HER FACE with Ricky Ricardo garbage,,,"you got some slainin' to do" went BEYOND offensive.
For years, one of the very worst - and most powerful - "nativists" in Congress was Democratic Senator Harry Byrd of West Virginia, who not only opposed illegal immigration, but wanted to see LEGAL immigration reduced. He was the elder statesman of the restrictionists in Congress, I would argue.
Well, Obama has a lot of "splaining" to do, too, no? He absolutely promised immigration reform in year one of his presidency, and managed to bamboozle so many Latinos into switching their support from Hilllary. For what?
You do realize that Obama ended up cutting illegal immigrants completely out of Obamacare, saying don't worry, they'll all be legalized anyway. Oh really? He's lost a lot of credibility, and even these little pandering maneuvers on the deportations - they just confirm how little he has prioritized this.
He's promising first year action again, if re-elected? But note the fine print: "If I have a supportive Congress." Well, the problem is, the GOP-led Congress is about to steal the initiative away from him.
I think it's "half a loaf" time, and Dems better figure out how to regain the initiative - or not. Rubio is becoming a real - and growing - "threat." And right now Dems are tripping all over themselves trying to figure out how to respond.
Harry Reid reversed himself, saying of course he''ll work with Rubio - and now Durbin just came out against. Very bad
There is no mention of any enforcement measures or any measures to protect the jobs of poorer, less-skilled Americans. No mention of making e-verify mandatory.
This is the same old "no compromise" -- "let everybody in" -- "Mexico must be evacuated" advocacy. What they are now doing is just prioritizing illegals brought here as minors and low cost engineers and programmers (as long as the employers promise that they were not willing to pay more).
Doesn't that seem a little fast? It would be a very confused voter who suddenly felt that the Republicans with their watered down DREAM act were the defenders of undocumented workers, and the friends of Latinos. That voter must have been completely unaware of the last 10 years of Republican political positions on the issue, and must be completely ignorant of the stances Mitt Romney has taken in the last 5 months.
Now we are looking at compromise bills like Rubio's that explicitly address the issues you are raising. Beneficiaries will not get green cards and can't sponsor family members, period. I suspect Rubio will also stiffen the screening of the beneficiaries and not allow those who can't serve in the military or go to college to qualify.
One of the things that sometimes gets missed here is that the Pentagon is a big, big supporter of the Dream Act. The Pentagon has even factored the bill's eventual passage into its latest force structure planning estimates. The military wants the recruits, and they know that poor Latinos are ripe for military service.
This is going to move ahead in one form or another. It's a question of the timing and the exact modality, think.. There's now even a competing bill to Rubio's on the GOP side.