From The Washington Post
Monday, May 4, 2009
On many questions, President Obama’s approach is full speed ahead. On immigration reform, he prefers to take things one step at a time. There really is no alternative. Immigration is politically vexing because it splits both parties and scrambles the usual ideological alignments. There is no clear majority on this issue. Roughly a third of Americans strongly favor granting illegal immigrants a way to become citizens, while another third is strongly opposed. An ambivalent middle knows the status quo is unsustainable and wants a comprehensive solution, yet is also upset about the government’s failure to stop illegal immigration.
Moving us in that direction is not about doing favors for illegal immigrants. It’s about strengthening the American community. Obama needs to use the time he is buying himself to make that case.
The Obama administration has particular worries of its own. Obama won last year with overwhelming support from Latino voters who helped him carry such swing states as New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada. Latino political leaders are appropriately insistent that the president keep his promise to fix immigration and end a system that, in Obama’s words, “keeps those undocumented workers in the shadows.”
But the president’s lieutenants are well aware that Obama also won in swing states where there is less sympathy for a path to legalization (Indiana, North Carolina and Ohio) and do not want to throw immigration reform into an already combustible legislative mix.
So Obama has been sending two signals simultaneously: Yes we can, but not quite yet.
On April 9, a front-page headline in the New York Times read: “Obama to Push Immigration Bill as One Priority.” The story spoke of the president’s plans “to begin addressing the country’s immigration system this year.” It was the sign Latino leaders badly wanted to see.
But note that word “begin.” That’s different from legislating anytime soon, as Obama made clear at his news conference last week. He said all the right things about the urgency of change. “We can’t continue with a broken immigration system,” he argued. “It’s not good for anybody.”
Yet his answer lacked fierce urgency. “We want to move this process,” he said, and he spoke of the importance of “building confidence.” And then he kicked responsibility over to Congress. “Ultimately,” he said, “I don’t have control of the legislative calendar.”
There is much fascination with the role of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in crafting the administration’s response. As a Democratic House leader, he was decidedly cautious on immigration reform (to the consternation of Latino organizations), but he has emerged recently as a supporter of action — eventually.
Emanuel is candid in saying that his perspective from the White House differs from the view he needed to take as an adviser to Democrats from highly competitive districts. While noting that his own voting record was sympathetic to comprehensive immigration reform, Emanuel observed in an interview that many of his electorally vulnerable Democratic colleagues hailed from areas in which such a position would be unpopular.
“My job then was to give them the best political advice I could, given the districts they were representing,” he said. “My job now is to see this issue from a national perspective and from the president’s perspective.” And Emanuel was mightily impressed with the Latino political mobilization in 2008.
Yet Emanuel and Obama know that most of those same Democrats still represent competitive seats and continue to worry about the costs of a vote for immigration reform. That’s why the administration has settled on a strategy of slowly building consensus rather than moving fast.
Hispanic Democrats have sent a strong signal to the business lobbies. They are saying that until comprehensive reform passes, they will withhold their votes for temporary fixes to raise immigration ceilings for groups of workers sought by particular industries. They hope to pressure business to pressure Republicans to toss more votes toward immigration reform.
The success of immigration reformers will ultimately depend on winning over those in the ambivalent middle and not treating them as xenophobes or racists.
The core argument for reform must be that the presence of so many illegal migrants without any enforceable rights undermines the rights of everyone else. The real message that a path to citizenship will send is that all long-term residents of our country should be able to assume their responsibilities as Americans.
Should President Obama make immigration reform one of his top priorities or should he continue to proceed with caution? Is it better to rush to please voters or to bide your time in hopes of getting better end results?
I seem to recall ‘gays in the military’ being made a priority when President Bill Clinton first assumed office. He quickly found out that there was a great deal of opposition out there in voter land. Rather than risk legislation that ban gays from the military, he settled for ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’
This contentious issue took a huge bite out of President Clinton’s behind. He pissed off the military and the conservatives and he pissed off the gay activists who felt they had been sold out. It appears that President Obama will have to walk a similar tight rope to avoid that huge bite which is bound to be chomping around out there.
Rahm Emanuel’s honesty is remarkably refreshing. He admits the scenery looks a little different from behind his White House walls. Rahm Emanuel gets it.
I think this op-ed is well thought out. The opening paragraphs:
Especially the second paragraph…the part about CIR is “not about doing favors for illegal immigrants”. Something has to give in order to resolve the issue. There truly is no alternative…that many people can simply not be deported. It won’t happen, so it is better to focus on what CAN be done and get over the fact that they came here illegally and just allow them to become the American’s that they came here to be. I think the hysteria that illegal immigrants are all molesters and murderers has, for the most part, been debunked. Of course there are a few bad apples, there are certainly American citizens that are bad apples, too. That is just the way it is. And CIR can identify those “bad apples” and they won’t make it through the process.
here is another immigration news! on may 1st 2009
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300087
E.J. Dionne’s piece in today’s WaPo op/ed is next to a tribute
to the late Jack Kemp by Michael Gerson “Head and Heart,
Remembering Jack Kemp”.
It observes “Even in Jack’s absence, we know precisely what
he would say: You can’t divide wealth you don’t create. Don’t
punish the rich,enable everyone to become rich. Value the dreams
and contributions of immigrants. Be a happy warrior, not an
angry one….”.
Jack Kemp was a great American, a “Happy Warrior”.
R.I.P.
The first thing that needs to be done is our southern boarder needs to be secured. You can’t have any kind of immigration reform if tens (or hundreds) of thousands still just walk over illegally every year. People get frustrated by anything resembling amnesty because we are just going to have to do it again in another 10 years when the numbers get to big to ignore.
Also, I think allot of people forget that Bush tried to pass immigration reform a while back when the economy was booming, we had record low unemployment rates and it didn’t work. Obama is no idiot, he knows there is no way it would pass with unemployment as high as it is today. It’s a dead issue and will be for quite some time to come.
This is what I see happening… nothing will be done as far as immigration reform is concerned, ICE with be cut back even more, the numbers of people entering the U.S. illegally will swell, people will demand reform, some type of reform will be brought up but will not pass because we still have not secured our southern boarder. the end, nothing will change.
Obama’s got some real heavy lifting in front of him. Don’t tell ShellyB….she thinks there’s only 3 people left that are against CIR (amnesty, path-to-citizenship, etc).
That’s exactly why it’s a dead issue and why he has yet to do anything about it. Heck, he has barely even talked about it because he knows it would cause an uproar. If he pushed amnesty now he would lose allot of moderates that currently ‘approve’ of his job performance so far.
If anyone, including ShellyB, think that the number of people against amnesty or path to citizenship is shrinking just wait until congress tries to address it again.
which reminds me of that complete idiot Janet Nap., did anyone hear the rumors that she is being considered for the supreme court!?! God help us.
Since we are sharing favorites from the Post today, Howard Kurtz slams the media for coverage of Specter defection, swine flu, and the death of the Republican party.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/03/AR2009050301914.html
And the New York Times has announced that it will close the Boston Globe in a couple of weeks, leaving Boston without a major daily newspaper.
What every happened to middle ground on which immigrants get to stay? How about paying a fine and passing background checks and you get to stay here with work papers?
Nice tribute, Poor Richard.
The Dow just closed at 213. That is definitely good news.
I keep hearing all this doom and gloom and the stock market continues to climb. Go bulls go. Run Bulls Run! I felt like I was watching the Wall Street Derby this afternoon for sure.
You Go Moon-Howler! Another few months like the last two and
my 401K is back to even! Wa-Ho!
Perhaps Obama has read the “Art of War” – you attack when and where
you have the advantage and only then. Obama doesn’t have the numbers
now on immigration – there is much work to be done to secure the
pragmatic middle before he starts a major campaign on this issue.
He wants to win, not lead a glorious noble defeat.
“The success of immigration reformers will ultimately depend on
winning over those in the amblivant middle and not treating them
as xenophopes or racist.”
Your goal is not to win over the BVBLers, you won’t, but to
secure the middle and — win.
There are less border crossings now, border enforcement efforts have been increased, the fence has been started in San Diego. Well, the list could go on and on…
Additionally, there is an economic benefit to addressing this issue because of benefits that could be seen in the housing sector alone.
And if that’s not good enough for you, I hear Jennifer Granholm, the uber-incompetent governor of Michigan. Can’t imagine why ole Michigan is in the toilet, huh?
@Poor Richard
You put that very well, considering it is literally a war on the nation.
Go Wall Street. I’m finally starting to erase a lot of my losses last year. Let’s just hope something doesn’t happen to make it drop again… But in the long term as the economy starts to improve the stock market should continue to improve, even if there are some short term downswings.
Historically, anti-immigrant sentiment has always seen it’s best days when there is economic uncertainty. People can be made to be very afraid and selfish, and not think about the country’s future. This has been behind the backlash against the Irish, the Chinese, the Italians, the Germans, and pretty much every other immigrant group.
Now that neither party sees any political hay to be made using anti-immigrant sentiment for votes, I expect that Congress will move forward in a bi-partisan manner. But it is better to wait until the economic uncertainty has died down.
@Gainesville Resident
I threw a couple of thousand in a couple of months ago. Over 40% return….beats the heck out of a savings account!
I couldn’t agree with you more, but tell that to the millions of senior citizens who are having to go back to work, right? To me, 38, it’s a super-duper buying opportunity. To those in their 70’s who have lost everything…..maybe not so hot?
Given the opposition the Senate ran into when it tried to “reform” our immigration laws, it is not hard to understand why Obama is sitting on the issue. He has nothing much to gain by doing anything about it. With unemployment increasing, the industries that employ illegal immigrants don’t need the need more cheap labor.
Slowpoke – I too did some investing in November on a few stocks that I felt had bottomed out – and one stock is up over 50% but all are at least up 40%. That is how I’m making up for my losses last year. Hard to believe a 50% return in less than 6 months!
As you say however, not so good for folks in their 60’s or older, who lost a lot of retirement savings. A lesson for all of us a little younger (in my case anyway) – when you get near retirement better move a lot of it out of the stock market – you never know when it will take a dump in the short term and might not recover in time for retirement! Hope I can remember that lesson when I get to be 60. I don’t expect to retire until I’m 67 or so – I figure at age 60 better move most of it to something safe.
Perhaps the secret when you are near retirement is to diversify. There are no hard and fast rules about leaving the stock market at 60. The main question is, how soon do you need ALL your money. No one should have lost everything unless their 401k’s were set up wrong.
True enough – diversification is a good thing. And how soon you need your money is a factor too. I just think after watching my 401K lose 40% last year, which is split among 10 different investments, for me personally I’m going to move a lot of it to something safer when I hit age 60, just in case. Everyone has to make up their own mind though, and be comfortable with the risk they are taking. I just wouldn’t be terribly happy with a 40% drop in value at age 60, let’s put it that way. As of this year – before today it was showing a 0.5% YTD gain, so today should make it look better YTD. Still doesn’t make up for that 40% loss last year, unfortunately.
Go Caps! Two up on the Penguins!(Know at least one Russian
immigrant that is popular here – hat tricks in playoff games
will do that).
Diversification is a strategy that helps to mitigate loss but I think it should be enacted in the correct context. Whats happening in the markets has never happened before. We’re out in uncharted waters here without a compass.
There’s little chance we’ve hit bottom. It might be a good idea to take advantage of this temporary bump in the market to get some portion or all of your portfolio out of the market and fiat currency before the second, more drastic downward trend begins. Gold and raw materials look good.
I scooped up some Citigroup when it was around 1.70 because it seemed the federal government had publicly committed to do everything to save it. I have no faith in the company. This was a straight up gamble that politics would trump the market. I got lucky. I think you can say the same thing about the market in general. Putting your money in the market right now is, with a few exceptions, gambling as opposed to investing.
I think Obama is taking the right approach to comprehensive immigration reform. By turning undocumented workers into legal residents and citizens, they would not be exploitable by businesses. Business owners would have to comply with minimum wage laws, for instance. Consequently, Native-born Americans, especially ignorant and uneducated ones with no valuable job skills, would be able to compete for low-skill, low-paying jobs on an even playing field. Everyone (except greedy business owners) would benefit.
In 2006 and 2007, demagoguery and fear-mongering vis a vis the immigration issue was a desperate tactic seized upon by a few, short-sighted partisans losing confidence in the GOP as Iraq and Katrina began to sink the Bush presidency.
Desperate times call for desperate measures, some might argue. But the tactic couldn’t even win the 2008 primary, and ended up damaging the party’s brand in every region of the country, perhaps save one.
Some argue, effectively, that the loss in 2008 was deserved. But it certainly did not ease the sense of desperation … and despite the demographic writing on the wall, there are some in the GOP who still want to play to prejudice in order to win elections. I think this is a recipe for disaster.
THEREFORE, here is another Republican pep talk from former Sen. Howard Baker! Enjoy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/04/AR2009050402942.html
True, I think there may be another correction coming in the market.
I too did a pure gamble on a few companies in November that I thought hit bottom. I got lucky, plain and simple as that. As of today one company is up 73.5% on my investment back in November. I’m kind of in that one for the long haul – it may bump down when the market drops again, but I think as the economy improves it has the potential to soar some more. It is still WAY WAY down from where it was a year ago. It is not a company that is beaten down either.
I did gamble on a somewhat beaten down company and it is up slightly over 50% now.
I will agree it is a bit of gambling right now with the market. But if you are doing it for the long haul as I am, it still is investing. Especially the one company I bought into that I’d been following for some time but was waiting for it to get to a cheap price.
I did get lucky, and have not been as lucky in the past. I may cash in on some of my gains, but some I’m in for the long haul.
Now that the bubble has burst this whole “conmprehensive approach” BS is unsalable. We will acheive any consensus only when we agree not to reward those who broke our laws.
Gainesville, I think you got real lucky and you also listened when you should have. And we will all come to you for a loan! 😉
Rick, we will never achieve a concensus on all of it. If you pay a fine and jump through the hoops, how is that a reward? That is the question everyone always ignores when they just keep repeating rhetoric.
I would sure like some details on how the number of this “fine” is arrived at, where the money is going to go, and how specifically it’s going to offset the damage done by illegal immigrants in this country (what damage, right? how about the environmental disaster these folks leave behind in the deserts of the Southwestern US…there’s one thing of a thousand), who specifically is going to ensure that this fine is collected, what waivers will be in place. I would also like to know what these “hoops” are they have to jump through. Hoops like those immigrants who came here legally went through? Or other, lesser hoops? And don’t even bring up “learn English”, the absolute funniest thing anyone ever said. I know this is just one of those areas where we’re going to disagree, and that’s that….but I’m sorry, anything other than go home and do it the right way is going to wind up being amnesty.
MH – the “Bank of Gainesville” is open for business. Not saying what interest rate I’ll charge you though! Then again, I’ve been equally as unlucky in the stock market, so don’t look to me for any sage stock market advice – if you follow me you might lose more than you’d want to. This is a one time very extreme piece of luck in all my time investing in the stock market, and for all I know it could possibly fade as quickly as it happened. Then again, maybe I was due for some luck after the drubbing I had last year and the year before…
I have to believe whatever “fine” will really have to go to pay for the increased workload in Immigration & Naturalization to process all the paperwork involved. Right now it is sort of a “pay as you go system” in that it costs several thousand dollars to move someone through the process – at least in my wife’s case that is what it has cost so far. They recently doubled most of the fees too, again supposedly because their workload increased. If their workload is already high – imagine what it will be like when they have to handle 12 million or more new cases if immigration reform is passed. I can see the fees increasing again for everyone.
The fees were doubled in most cases as of July of 2007. It caused a huge flood of applications right before that trying to avoid the fee increase. Problem is, there are multiple steps in some applications (like my wife’s) and we still aren’t done with the process so will be paying those higher fees as have another step to do in July of this year. I suspect there’s even some fee at the final step when US Citizenship is attained, but not sure, as that is still far off in the distance for us. I shudder to think what the fee for that must be currently. Have to pay roughly $1000 in July for the next step.
It seems to me that in 2007, when the last comprehensive immigration bill was in congress, there was a $5000 fine being suggested for those who wanted to remain in the country. That’s where I was getting my ‘facts and figures,’ Slow. What with inflation, it will probably double. I have no idea what fund it was supposed to go into. It never got that far. I just didn’t see it as amnesty.
Gainesville, it shouldn’t be that freaking complicated and expensive for someone, especially a spouse, to come in to this country LEGALLY.
I think you were very lucky. re the market. LOL-Bank of Gainesville.
“Rick, we will never achieve a concensus on all of it. ”
Yes and I will never accept a compromise that sells integrity and rule of law for a “fine” – at the cost of increasing US poverty, towards the end goal of keeping labor cheap.
“If you pay a fine and jump through the hoops, how is that a reward? ”
Do it, watch tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions, more people coming in over a quick span, then interview them in Spanish and see if they thought a $5000 fine was a real punishment.
“That is the question everyone always ignores when they just keep repeating rhetoric”
Well I’m not just repeating rhetoric mindlessly. I’m telling you my considered opinion on an important issue that I will fight for, endlessly and ceaselessly. It seems to me that the empty rhetoric is all the BS we were told in support of Amnesty 2006 and Amnesty 2007, “we need more low-wage workers to continue to grow”, “there are too many jobs to fill with just Americans”, etc. etc.
@Moon-howler
I didn’t call them your “facts and figures”. I never called anything like that into question….just said I’d like to know….had nothing to do with you or your sources or anything such. And we already know we disagree on the word amnesty…no big deal…it happens!
Slow, I know you didn’t call them that. Sorry for the confusion. I was just reflecting back to what I remember of the 2007 bill. My source is in my own head, which I will admit is sometimes forgetful. My comments to you were not intended to be contentious.
And you ar eright, we do disagree on the amnesty definition. But that doesn’t mean we can’t work around it.
On the positive side illegal immigration is down and so are remittances. Now if we can keep the politicians focused on securing the borders and cracking down on illegal employers we wouldn’t have to deal with this festering criminal problem, and Amnesty won’t solve it it will only worsen it down the road. Immigration rules and standards must be tightened to address it.