There’s no way on earth that any kind of major immigration reform will pass between now and November, 2012. Democrats should push the issue anyway, though, because (a) it’s a big political winner and (b) if Republicans take enough of a beating among Latino voters in 2012, they may change their tune and help pass something in the next Congress or the one after.
I understand the rationale for not pushing it earlier. I don’t know if Democrats had 60 Senators ready to vote for it — Ben Nelson and Evan Bayh are cynical enough and dumb enough to have thought it would be a bad idea, for example — in the last Congress and if Obama had tried and failed with a Democratic Congress, it would have looked worse than not trying at all.
Now is a perfect time to try. Republicans will block it and they’ll pay a price at the polls for doing so. The only way to make progress on this issue right now is beat Republicans with it until they say uncle.
Stefan
President Obama and his team are eager to tout all they’ve done on border security in order to inoculate one of the key obstacles to moving the debate back to comprehensive immigration reform: a pathway to citizenship for the roughly 11-12 million immigrants currently residing in the United States illegally.
Fine, but first what about a pathway to citizenship for legal residents here?
jibeaux
@Stefan:
I’m no immigration lawyer, but generally green card holders are entitled to sit for the citizenship exam after a certain period of time, are they not?
One angle that just occurs to me as far as the illegal immigrants living here, is that every proposal I’ve ever read involves paying a fine. So given that most of these people aren’t going to hightail back to Mexico or Somalia or Nicaragua anytime real soon despite the downturn here, why would we forego the opportunity for millions of $ in revenue?
geg6
@Stefan:
I was unaware that there wasn’t one. Funny, but I have several students with green cards who are pursuing citizenship. Guess I’ll have to let them know there isn’t one.
/snark
And I couldn’t agree with you more on this, Doug. Perfect timing.
cyntax
Maybe Pelosi or Hoyer would be willing to employ such tactics, but congressional Dems as a group will be reluctant to spoil the bipartisan decorum that’s served them so well up to this point.
But here’s hoping they take your advice.
Zifnab
I’m curious how they’ll bring the bill up. They can put it on the floor of the Senate, but the Republicans will just do the anonymous hold double-super-secret filibuster dance. They can’t even try to bring the bill up for a vote in the House.
Is Reid going to turn this into a genuine filibuster fight and get Republican Senators repeatedly on record as opposing immigration reform? And is he even going to have the requisite 51 votes in his own caucus to pass something? If John’s favorite W. Virginia Senator balks and Lieberman pulls a Lieberman and Nelson demands $100 billion in Nebraska corn subsidies for his vote… :-p It’s going to be Reid who looks the fool.
Martin
@Stefan: Yeah, not only that, but they need to massively, massively streamline the citizenship process. The only winners under the current policy are immigration lawyers.
But this is a winning political move by Obama. The GOP will tie themselves up in knots over the next year fighting over who can design the most Aryan America.
Ghanima Atreides
I predicted this.
13D chess rules.
;)
Martin
@Zifnab: Dude, it’s election season. Obama can announce at every campaign stop that he’s drafted legislation and sent it to Congress. The procedural bullshit in Congress doesn’t matter this time of year.
Loneoak
The first step of immigration reform should be to put Joe Arpaio in leg chains and drag him behind a boat to Gitmo.
fhtagn
@Loneoak:
In pink underwear.
geg6
@Loneoak: @fhtagn:
Can’t disagree with either of these suggestions. But I want to make sure there’s video. Video, or it didn’t happen.
danimal
FTFY. With this crop of GOP nihilists, the only way to get real change is to beat them (metaphorically) into submission. They just aren’t wired for compromise and conciliation. This group needs to swallow a lot of bitter medicine until the adults reemerge in the GOP.
fhtagn
@geg6:
Also too, mutated sea bass, with laser beams.
Suffern ACE
@Martin: That’s really started to bother me about our system. Basically, we sat a new Congress in January….and now it’s election season for 18 months. So basically in the two years of each Congress, there is 4 months at the beginning and two months at the end where we need to take proposals seriously.
I’m starting to favor the whole monarchy concept more every day.
mikefromArlington
“because (a) it’s a big political winner”
What polling are you referring to that points to evidence it’s a big political winner?
fhtagn
@mikefromArlington:
It’s a winner because it solidifies Latino support, maybe even increases it if the GOP are especially high on bigotry in their response to the idea.
Suffern ACE
How is this an electoral winner for Dems, though. I just don’t see it quite yet. I thought “Round them all up” “Fines are too soft on crime” mob won almost everywhere it popped up in November 2010…
geg6
@fhtagn:
Dolphins. Magical dolphins.
Loneoak
@geg6:
And narwhals, poking him in sensitive areas.
Zifnab
@Martin: It does if you want to get Republicans and Democrats alike on record. But if Reid holds a vote and comes up with 49 Senators “AYE”, the Republicans will just turn it around and announce “Even Democrats don’t want this legislation to pass” logic be damned.
I’m all for holding Republican feet to the fire. I just hope they’ve got a coherent plan.
piratedan
well it’s another R idea that he can borrow and promote that isn’t exactly progressive but again is a step towards sanity. Just like Romneycare, he can promote the idea that he can be bipartisan and show that he is willing to adopt ideas no matter where they come from for the common good. Then, just like when it happened under the Bush years, the xenophobes and anchor baby fearmongers will step out and show themselves and Obama can then point to it and show the Latinos that its not on him….11th dimension chess it ain’t but because the beltway punditry can even be bothered to check their flys, it’ll come as a shock to them all.
geg6
@Suffern ACE:
Possibly because Latino voters didn’t show up at the polls in the numbers they could have:
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1973/latino-electorate-midterm-2010
Martin
@Suffern ACE: Well, we could just shrink down the election season. It doesn’t need to start in Jan and end in Nov. It could start in August and end in Nov.
Joe Beese
I imagine there are a lot of registered voters who would rather hear Obama talking about creating jobs for them – rather than instituting guest worker programs for foreigners.
Stefan
Stefan: I’m no immigration lawyer, but generally green card holders are entitled to sit for the citizenship exam after a certain period of time, are they not?
If you can get a green card in the first place, which is in no way guaranteed. But I have, for example, Canadian friends who have American graduate degrees, live and work here on employer-sponsored work visas, and can’t qualify to apply for a green card.
Stefan
I was unaware that there wasn’t one. Funny, but I have several students with green cards who are pursuing citizenship. Guess I’ll have to let them know there isn’t one.
Yes, they already have green cards. Not everyone can get a green card, though. You have to apply, and not everyone who wants one gets one.
Triassic Sands
Baja Arizona — a great idea.
Stefan
How is this an electoral winner for Dems, though. I just don’t see it quite yet. I thought “Round them all up” “Fines are too soft on crime” mob won almost everywhere it popped up in November 2010…
Off-year elections are different from presidential year elections. The first tends to draw an older, whiter set of voters to the polls, while the latter brings in a younger, more diverse electorate. With the country becoming steadily less white, the GOP is facing a demographic time bomb if it holds on to its nativist line.
geg6
@Stefan:
They probably don’t qualify under any of the eligibility requirements. Just because they have American graduate degrees or work for an American company does not guarantee a green card. There are quotas for each employment eligibility category, which is probably what your friends are trying for. It’s a lot easier (if still a years long process) if you have relatives here who are citizens and no quotas at all if you are an immediate relative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Permanent_Resident_Card
Judas Escargot
@Zifnab:
I thought the new Senate rules did away with secret holds?
Sure, they’ll filibuster, but I thought it could no longer be an anonymous one (I could be wrong).
Martin
@Suffern ACE: Didn’t happen out west. California kicked all of the state Republicans out of executive offices, out of some legislative offices, and sent all of their Dems back to DC.
Remember, the large Latino population is young. 50% of babies born in CA now are Latino. A lot of those eligible voters are young – 18-25 and suffer from the same 18-25 low turnout. Those black voters are distributed much more like the nation as a whole in terms of age, so it’s not so surprising that they vote similarly.
It’s coming. We’re seeing it here in CA in a big, big way. It’ll hit other states shortly.
Stefan
If you can get a green card in the first place, which is in no way guaranteed. But I have, for example, Canadian friends who have American graduate degrees, live and work here on employer-sponsored work visas, and can’t qualify to apply for a green card.
To explain this in more detail, if you’re a foreign citizen temporarily living and working in the US, in order to get a green card not through marriage or the lottery you have to have your employer sponsor you. However, the employer can only sponsor you if it submits a labor certification request to the Department of Labor, and the DOL then has to determine that there are no qualified U.S. workers “able, willing, qualified and available to accept the job at the prevailing wage for that occupation in the area of intended employment and that employment of the alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed U.S. workers” — or, more simply, there can be no American who can do the job, which is practically never the case.
Now, lots of employers, particularly in the tech field, will submit these applications fraudently, knowing full well that they could hire an American to do the job. But other, more honest employers won’t, and if you can’t get the employment sponsorship then you can’t apply for the green card.
Martin
@Joe Beese: Hmm. And yet I don’t see anything about Obama creating a guest worker program for anything other than farm workers, and I had to reach back to 2008 for that.
Unicorn Obama letting you down again?
piratedan
@Triassic Sands: well it isn’t the southern part of the state that is complete whacked, it’s those happy friendly folks in Maricopa… and yeah, I signed the petition.
Stefan
They probably don’t qualify under any of the eligibility requirements. Just because they have American graduate degrees or work for an American company does not guarantee a green card.
Well, exactly. That’s my point. If there’s a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who broke the law to get here, there should also be a path to citizenship for those people who followed all the rules.
There are quotas for each employment eligibility category, which is probably what your friends are trying for. It’s a lot easier (if still a years long process) if you have relatives here who are citizens and no quotas at all if you are an immediate relative.
Again, this is my point. My friends don’t have relatives here who are citizens, all they have is graduate degrees from top American schools and years of working for American companies and paying American taxes. That should guarantee them a path to citizenship or at the least permanent residency and yet it doesn’t.
jacy
Yeah, I don’t see how this can be a bad idea. It gives the impression that Obama is just going to keep on pressing forward with the business of the country regardless of the Republicans standing on the train tracks, and any time you can get Republicans to double-down on their racism and xenophobia, it marginalizes them more with not-old-white-men crowd. Incrementalism, baby.
Martin
@Zifnab: But elections aren’t about what’s currently in committee, it’s about what you want to do. Obama can talk about immigration reform being one of his major thrusts in his 2nd term. He can send a bill to Congress and then talk about it. His opponent is going to talk about all of the pie in the sky things that they want to do once they get the office, none of which is currently in process. That’s how campaigning is.
Martin
@Stefan:
I think it’s safe to say that there will be. I don’t think this is a point that we need to argue over. In 2008, Obama always said that a path to citizenship puts them at the end of the line. But it puts them in the line.
geg6
@Stefan:
The Wiki link I posted above in #29 explains all of this in detail. It’s a bit more complicated than you have explained. It’s the quotas that cause many to have trouble, from my experience. But I see plenty of green card holders in my job capacity here in lily white, homogeneous Western PA, so I guess I don’t see it in the same way you do. You have three friends having trouble. I have worked 15 years in higher ed student aid, where green cards are not uncommon at all.
Stefan
I think it’s safe to say that there will be.
I wish I was as hopeful about that as you are, but I’m not.
Stefan
The Wiki link I posted above in #29 explains all of this in detail.
Thanks, but I’m a lawyer so I think I won’t bother with the Wiki link but will instead rely on my familiarity with statutes, legislation, and case law.
It’s a bit more complicated than you have explained.
Yes, it’s much more complicated than can easily be explained in short blog posts. It’s also much more complicated, obviously, than snarking “Funny, but I have several students with green cards who are pursuing citizenship. Guess I’ll have to let them know there isn’t one.”
It’s the quotas that cause many to have trouble, from my experience.
It’s the labor certification that is holding my friends up — or rather it’s the fact that they work for honest companies that comply with the labor certification requirements while many other employers game the system.
But I see plenty of green card holders in my job capacity here in lily white, homogeneous Western PA, so I guess I don’t see it in the same way you do. You have three friends having trouble. I have worked 15 years in higher ed student aid, where green cards are not uncommon at all.
Yeah, and? Of course some people get green cards — and some people don’t. That’s my point — that it’s not guaranteed, it’s complicated and confusing, and if we’re going to address illegal immigrants we should also address the needs of those who have carefully complied with all requirements and still can’t jump through all the hoops.
ppcli
@geg6: What he said. It really makes a difference where you are. My first dealings with the INS were in NYC. Unbelievable nightmare. Longest lines and most hostile clerks I’ve ever encountered. My wife (US citizen) and I were living in Pittsburgh when I had the Green Card interview. Nice, quiet office downtown. No lines, hardly anyone there. Our interview was over so fast we were almost disappointed. Didn’t even want to look at the marriage photo album we brought.
Advice to Green Card Seekers: Pittsburgh, baby!
Joel
I don’t see immigration law reform as a short-term winner. But it’s a good long term strategy, as well as being morally right.
taylormattd
Ah, nice one Doug. I love me some Salt n Pepa.
Steve M.
There’s no way on earth that any kind of major immigration reform will pass between now and the time a global coalition of nations takes over the administration of the United States government after the end of the Second Civil War.
jibeaux
@Martin:
Right, I think Obama is pretty aware of that issue. And it’s what you hear a lot of times from people, is that it isn’t fair to let illegal immigrants “jump the line”, when there isn’t any proposal to let them jump the line — it’s just to let them be in it, at the end. Sometimes people, I don’t think Stefan as he sounds pretty well versed in this, seem to think illegal immigrants are just too lazy or unwilling to take the legal path and they don’t really grasp that if you’re an unskilled laborer with a fifth grade education from Central America, there is no legal path. The free market definitely thinks you’re worth having, but the immigration laws do not agree.
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
@jibeaux:
um, because by legalizing the illegal immigrants, or allowing them to sit for a test and pay a fee, the free ride we get on them paying for things they can’t actually use, like fica, would come to an end.
eta, not anti immigrant, btw, i am just saying the revenue argument is self-immolating.
The Raven
It could backfire at the polls–does the support of some Latinos outweigh the increased opposition from anti-immigrant voters?–, and it might turn into another way to attack US labor. This administration has blown so many policy opportunities that I figure that they’ll blow this one, too. It may help win the next election, though.
BTW, it is not actually a crime to be in the USA without permission, though the US government deports undocumented aliens. The phrase “illegal immigrant” is a slander.
OzoneR
Much like healthcare, immigration is a complex problem that requires a complex solution that will have things in it everyone hates which will make it easy to demagogue, and that will only amplify given this country’s history of racism and xenophobia and the media’s insatiable passion to divide people and create meta-wars for ratings.
OzoneR
@The Raven:
COULD backfire? The political problem with this is the anti-immigrant movement will be angry it was tried and the Latinos will be angry it failed. Everyone’s pissed and the problem still remains.
OzoneR
@Steve M.:
I think it’s possible if Democrats have Congress in Obama’s second term, SOMETHING could pass. The Latino vote will eventually become more important than the white vote, but it’s going to be like healthcare, some compromise activists don’t care for and aren’t passionate about, white people are going to flip, perhaps worse because unlike healthcare, this is a cultural thing, and it’s going to cost the Democrats their majority again.
Omnes Omnibus
@ppcli: Your experience in Pittsburgh is very similar to the experience my wife and I had with CSIS in Columbus, OH. Nice people, helpful, etc. My wife actually ended up demanding that the guy look at the book of pictures that she had painstakingly assembled. Even with that, we spent more time in the waiting room than we did in the interview.
somethingblue
Okay. So let’s say the Democrats run with this, Latino voters buy it and turn out in droves, Obama is re-elected, the Democrats regain the House and … then what? They do nothing about immigration, once again, because sixty votes Ben Nelson Obama has a lot on his plate blah blah blah and oh look, it’s an election year again (and you can’t really expect Congress to do anything in an election year).
The Republicans have successfully milked anti-abortion voters like this for decades, but if I were a wise Latina or Latino I might start to feel like I was being used.
rikryah
While I commend the President for making this speech, this is what I feel about immigration (I’m probably to the right of most of you here):
Barack Obama IS NOT RESPONSIBLE for doing their heavy lifting.
The President has already told them that he WILL sign immigration reform, ONCE IT GETS TO HIS DESK.
This isn’t a problem for Barack Obama.
This isn’t even a problem or Democrats, because they are on board.
IF the Latinos want immigration reform, then their asses are going to have to do the heavy lifting themselves and GET THE 10 GOP VOTES IN THE SENATE.
What I want to know is,
How come Senator Anchor Baby Rubio from Florida, isn’t on the television talking about how he’s the point man in the Senate for Immigration Reform?
HOW COME?
I’m a political junkie and I haven’t seen his ass say SHYT about immigration reform.
I haven’t heard him say SHYT about the ‘ What about if you ain’t White’ Law that they want in Florida.
I haven’t seen the Latinos threatening GOP Senators with large Latino POPULATIONS.
NO sit-ins in their offices.
NO townhalls in their districts.
If the Latino vote is so important like they say it is, then how come they aren’t in the GOP’s faces.
The President had stuff to do his first two years, namely saving the economy and doing healthcare.
And, I say, without equivocation, that BOTH of them are far more important than him wasting any important political capital by trying to do immigration reform along with them. Sorry, but it needed to take a back seat.
IF the Latinos want Immigration reform, then they need to get their behinds out in the street, and organizing, and protesting the GOPers that are blocking him.
What they don’t need to do is offer anymore bullshyt threats like the weasel Guitierrez, talking about he doesn’t know if he can support the President.
FUCK HIM and anyone else that talks about not supporting the President over something that the President has already demonstrated –REPEATEDLY – that he’s for.
Let their asses vote for the GOP…and we’ll see how many more ‘ WHAT ABOUT IF YOU AINT WHITE, DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND’ laws the GOP can enact.
eemom
@Omnes Omnibus:
what’s this? You have to show wedding pictures to prove it’s not a “marriage of convenience”?
geg6
@ppcli:
I guess that was the point I was making. In my job and my geographical area, it’s very common for it to be a relatively easy process.
And I would not have snarked at him if he hadn’t made such general, sweeping statements that made it seem as if he didn’t have a clue. And honestly, unless he’s an immigration lawyer, his law degree doesn’t impress me as giving him any more insight into the process as my neighbor down the street who never deals with such things. I do all the time and I know the difficulties some face. I also know that it’s much, much harder to get a green card through the employment-based visa process than through the family-sponsored visa process.
Perhaps a lawyer should not have used his first comment on this thread to sound so ignorant as to make it seem that it is either impossible or next to impossible to get citizenship through the green card route when he apparently knows or should know that it is complete hyperbole. But then, we are talking about a lawyer here. Most (though certainly not all) of them think hyperbole is the only mode of communication.
eemom
@Omnes Omnibus:
btw, toko-loko is still at it on that “Flying” thread from yesterday. At this point she is literally talking to herself.
Uloborus
@somethingblue:
It’s true. We didn’t get health care reform or DADT repealed, either.
The Raven
@OzoneR: “immigration is a complex problem that requires a complex solution”
Actually, I think it is much simpler than health care; all that is holding back a solution is fear and greed.
@rikryah: Yes, it is obviously the fault of the Latinos. They must be wearing provocative clothing, or something.
Calouste
@Suffern ACE:
I’m starting to favor the whole monarchy concept more every day.
The system America has is a lot closer to an (enlightened) monarchy than the parliamentary monarchies in Europe. Prime Ministers don’t have a veto over parliament short of calling for new elections. Typically they don’t even have a veto ot special vote in cabinet meetings. And then can be removed by a simple majority vote at any time. The American President can’t be removed from office short of a trial.
fhtagn
@eemom:
I think she’s been transcribing her increasingly demented interior monologue for years.
fhtagn
@rikryah:
Immigration is a national issue, not just a Latino issue, and if politicians want votes, politicians have to be seen to lead on the issues. That’s just reality.
Omnes Omnibus
@eemom: Actually, wedding photos don’t do much. It is photos with family and friends, holiday pictures, vacation snapshots, and the like that make a difference. They want things that show that the couple is together and behaving as a married couple. In addition, financial records like joint bank accounts, being the beneficiaries of life insurance policies, etc., are useful.
@geg6: A little bit of pot, kettle there on your part, isn’t there? If you don’t get a green card through family or the lottery, it is technically possible, but stunningly unlikely that you will get one. My guess is that you deal with people who have green cards through their families and that you do not deal with very may who are hoping to get one through other means. As a result, our experience doesn’t really negate Stefan’s point (which was originally inartfully stated).
Omnes Omnibus
@eemom: Good lord.
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
yes, but what constitutes “leadership” on this issue differs outside the Latino community.
fhtagn
@OzoneR:
Sure, but that’s true of every issue. And, to be fair, people in the same community don’t always agree on the leadership they need. The point is that we can’t just dump immigration as an issue on Latinos and leave them to do all the work – and certainly not if we want their votes for the blue side of the debate.
geg6
@Omnes Omnibus:
Actually, because of the area being a hub for medical research, Bayer having a major manufacturing center just down the road, and Google having a major software engineering center in Pittsburgh, I see lots of people with green cards through the employment-based visa process and many fewer through the family-sponsored visa process. As I mentioned earlier, this is a lily-white, homogeneous slice of PA. There aren’t a lot of native Asian-Americans or Latinos here, so if there are people of that ethnicity with green cards in my office, you can bet they got them through employment. We have also gotten many green card holders through the political refugee route, mostly from Africa.
As for it being kettle v pot? Hardly. If you make as stupid a statement as he did in comment #1, you have to expect to get called out on it and I notice I’m not the only one who did. You’d think a lawyer would know better.
somethingblue
@Uloborus: Well, when major immigration reform passes in Obama’s second term, I’ll buy you a virtual beer, how’s that? :-)
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
The Latinos are the only group who support serious immigration reform. You’re not going to find support for what needs to be done among other communities. Everyone else pretty much wants Arizona-style fascism. So, yeah, Latinos ARE going to have to do all the work. Otherwise politicians are going to go the Arizona route, because that’s where the votes are.
Doug Harlan J
@OzoneR:
There are very few votes going the fascist route. Ask Sharron Angle, ask Mitt Romney. Ask the Republicans who thought they could in in New York State because of the drivers’ license thing Spitzer proposed.
People don’t show up at the polls to vote to deport people. But people do show up to vote against having their family deported.
This issue is a slam dunk winner for Democrats and anyone who can’t see that isn’t thinking it through.
Doug Harlan J
@rikryah:
This is also true. The faster Latinos start voting out people who oppose immigration reform, the faster immigration reform gets passed. But sooner or later, Latino numbers will be large enough that xenophobes get voted out one way or the other.
It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when.
fhtagn
@OzoneR:
That’s a ridiculous over-statement. There are plenty of people in the other communities who support immigration reform and who don’t want Arizona-style fascism. If the Democrats just turn tail and run from this issue, then Latinos are going to ask themselves why they should vote for a party that doesn’t have anything to offer them on the big issue. Given that they tend to skew somewhat to the socially conservative bracket, all other things being equal, this is not a good bargain for the Democrats to make, and it’s a strong reason for them not to take the much-touted demographic salvation line as destiny. If the Democrats sit around and wait for Latinos to save them, the likelihood of disappointment is considerable.
Beeb
Five Democratic Senators voted against cloture on the DREAM Act. Ben Nelson was one of them; the others were Tester, Baucus, Pryor, and Hagan. Three Republicans voted for it: Bennett, now replaced by a rabid Teahadi, Lugar, and Murkowski.
If Reid couldn’t get to 60 for that, I don’t think there’s any way he can pass any kind of immigration reform in this or the next Congress. And with five Democratic defections on DREAM, it’s hard to use immigration as a stick with which to beat Republicans. Not that Obama shouldn’t try, of course.
Joel
@fhtagn: Latinos are not conservative. That’s a myth. Nate Silver put it to rest a few years back, IIRC.
fhtagn
@Joel:
I said that they TEND to the more socially conservative view of things, which isn’t actually the more radical claim you attributed to me. It’s also something that Latinos will tell you themselves, and it’s not so long ago that Bush got a pretty decent chunk of the Latino vote, even if you don’t believe the claims of 44%. If the Democrats sit around and take Latinos for granted, they are likely to pay a bitter price in future.
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
Not nearly enough for a movement.
If Latinos don’t turn out when Democrats do fight for them (see Arizona), then Democrats are going to run on this issue, because that’s where the votes are. The Democrats have not been quiet in their opposition to the Arizona immigration law, yet they got killed there anyway in the last election.
OzoneR
@Doug Harlan J:
Jan Brewer disagrees with you. She went from trailing Terry Goddard by 10 points to beating him by double digits.
Small Paul
I think liberals really underestimate the amount of resentment towards illegal immigration in this country. This isn’t just an issue of fascist republicans trying to keep down hard-working migrants; it’s perceived, fairly or not,as a mass of low-skilled Central and Latin Americans breaking America’s laws and illegally taking advantage of myriad benefits during tough economic times.
For both political parties, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t. If you support a plan to legalize some illegals and put most of the rest on “path”, you will open yourself to charges of “amnesty”. If you don’t want to do anything regarding the immigration issue besides enforcement, you risk losing the Latino vote.
That’s why there won’t be a serious effort to reform our dysfunctional immigration system, although I think Obama will put forth a token effort.
fhtagn
@OzoneR:
How about you put some figures behind your assertions? What makes a “movement”? And the Democrats haven’t fought nearly hard enough. We’ve got plenty of Blue Dogs who cut and run, we’ve got plenty of wishy-washy fence-sitters, and overall we spend more time talking about how racist Republicans are towards Latinos than we do organizing and fighting for immigration reform. The result of this is that we basically explain to Latinos that our deeply-held principles, whatever they may be, compel us to leave the Latinos on their own, until we can take credit for whatever they achieve. And by the way, vote for us because the GOP are evil. Well, that’s not going to cut it for the future. It’s entirely possible that the GOP will re-invent itself as pro-business, pro-family, pro-Latino in a couple of electoral cycles, field some convincing candidates and take enough Latino votes, coupled with “Democratic” Latino disillusionment to make the Democrats look remarkably silly. I’ll refer you to Marco Rubio and Susana Martinez for a vision of that particular future.
Joel
@fhtagn: I agree with your general point, but the “Latinos are socially conservative” meme has been bandied around for years with little basis in fact. In fact, the racial/ethnic component of latino demographics are far less informative with regards to social policy than religious affiliation (i.e. protestant versus catholic).
fhtagn
@Joel:
As I point out, for the second time, I said that they TENDED that way. This is not the same claim as they ARE all socially conservative. Latinos are much more up for grabs as voters than the peddlers of the imminent Latino salvation meme would have us believe. Incidentally, if you want demographically significant data, look at the different age groups, different regions, different countries of origin. Yes, Catholic versus evangelical has some purchase, but it isn’t the whole story.
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
To many, that’s what they define as “leadership”
More power to them if they do, but they won’t, because that’s not where the votes are. Susana Martinez’ idea for immigration reform is a lot like Jan Brewers you know. If Latinos are going to vote for Martinez because they think she’ll serve their interests better than Democrats, they’re going to be even more disappointed.
The reason you’re not seeing movement in pro-Latino immigration reform is that there is NO active base supporting it. Blue Dogs cut and run because their districts and state do NOT support it. Large sections of the Democratic base, including some unions and suburban liberals, do NOT support what Latinos want in immigration reform. There is no united front for any specific type of reform on the left.
there is on the right, and that’s fascism.
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
Democrats don’t need Latinos to “save” them.
OzoneR
@Doug Harlan J:
This is 1000000% wrong and if you don’t think so, just look at the election results in the only state where Immigration was a major issue in 2010; Arizona.
There is no electoral proof that this is true. There is proof the other way around is true.
fhtagn
@OzoneR:
Well, that’s the line being offered by most of the Latino future salvationists. The Latino vote will magically lead us to a brave new liberal dawn, presumably complete with Spanish-speaking flying pink unicorns. As to why you think Democrats don’t need saving… we’ve lost the House, we may well lose the Senate, and Obama ain’t a shoe-in for re-election. Maybe you see grounds for optimism in all this, but it’s hard to see the Democrats as being in great shape right now.
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
no, the Latinos will get what they want when they are a political force people feel the need to pander to, whether it be Democrats or Republicans. It doesn’t have to be a “great liberal dawn,” perhaps it’s a “great conservative dawn” if Republicans decide they’re a vote worth pursuing.
If Republicans thought they needed their votes, they would pander to them, but they don’t, because they’re not a political force. Even where they are, it seems what they want is Arizona-style immigration reform; their Hispanic governors; Martinez and Sandoval, supported Arizona’s immigration law and their opponents did not, and the Republicans won the Latino vote!
Maybe if Democrats just support Arizona’a law, they’ll win Latinos, it worked for Republicans in Nevada and New Mexico.
.
I guess you missed the part about Obama’s approval ratings jumping up 12 points in some cases and Democrats holding a 4 point average in the congressional ballot.
fhtagn
@OzoneR:
If you seriously want to argue that the 12 point bounce from Bin Laden is going to carry through until 2012, I’d like some of what you are smoking. As for the 4 point average in the congressional ballot, that owes more to GOP folly than to any notable Democratic successes of late. If unemployment remains high and the economy is limping along in 2012, don’t expect voters to be enthusiastic about re-electing Obama, or keeping the Democrats in charge of the Senate. As matters stand, we look likely to lose the Senate, and not likely to regain the House. Maybe those things will change over time, and I hope they do, but the Democrats are not in great shape at this point, rosy visions of the future notwithstanding.
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
then it’s really not going to matter what Latinos do, is it?
fhtagn
@OzoneR:
You really don’t grasp logical argument, do you? The whole point of the debate is why Latino voters vote, and why Democrats need them to vote blue. Think about it, rather than auditioning for the Slate contrarian poster gig.
Stefan
Actually, because of the area being a hub for medical research, Bayer having a major manufacturing center just down the road, and Google having a major software engineering center in Pittsburgh, I see lots of people with green cards through the employment-based visa process and many fewer through the family-sponsored visa process. As I mentioned earlier, this is a lily-white, homogeneous slice of PA. There aren’t a lot of native Asian-Americans or Latinos here, so if there are people of that ethnicity with green cards in my office, you can bet they got them through employment.
Well, if they got them through employment, then I’m very suspicious as to how it was possible for such major firms. As I mentioned above, in order to sponsor an employee, the employer first has to prove to DOL that they were unable to find a suitable candidate for the job position in the domestic market. In order to do so, they have to go through a rigorous process where they advertise for the position, interview candidates, and go through various other recruiting formalities. (For example, ads detailing the job requirements are placed in newspapers and online, all applicants who meet the requirements have to be interviewed, the employer has to submit a detailed report of the recruiting campaign to the government, including proof that it ran the ads, etc.).
Only then does the employer file an application with DOL stating that they were not to find a suitably qualified and experienced American worker, but acccording to DOL, finding a US citizen applicant who meets even the minimum posted requirements and is available to take the job means that the employer will not be able to so certify. I find it very hard, if not impossible, to believe that Google, Bayer, etc. are not able to find any qualified Americans who apply for and can fill these jobs, especially in the midst of a recession. Of course, it may skew things being in Pittsburgh, but I doubt it.
I’ve personally dealt with this issue numerous times in the past years, as we have several foreign lawyers working for us. They’re great, and we’d like to sponsor them for green cards, but we can’t, because everytime we advertise for a position we get qualified American applicants, so we can’t truthfully file a form with DOL saying that no qualified US workers are available or willing to do the job — of course there are, especially (again) in the midst of a recession. So we can’t sponsor them, and if they can’t get sponsored by us, they’re out of luck unless they win the lottery or marry an American.
OzoneR
@fhtagn:
Yes, I get that, I see no evidence that “immigration reform,” whatever this is supposed to mean, is going to get them to vote blue. We’re supposed to just believe if we pass some “immigration reform,” whats in it, who knows, is going to get them to turn out. We can’t get them to turn out to give us the votes to get that bill in the first place. We are forced to rely on Republicans representing them, or Democrats representing states where there are few Latinos and a lot of xenophobia.
The Raven
Except for the progressives, and we’ve been marginalized. The loss of progressive voices in politics–the moderate left–is also the loss of voices of inclusion and tolerance.
JohnR
Wow – now that was impressive even for me; I managed to throw up a comment that was actually a reaction to a different post. Not that it matters, I suppose.
OzoneR
@The Raven:
I’m not even so sure Arizona-type fascism is unanimously opposed by progressives. Bring up immigration on Dkos and you’ll get a good number of people right wing talking points on the issue. OpenLeft was terrible with that.
They couldn’t win elections. A shame, but that’s reality.
pattonbt
The only reason this issue is a political winner for the D’s is that it gets R’s on the record saying nasty, racist, xenophobic things, thus putting off all non-whites further. To assume immigrants (and related citizen minority groups) naturally align with the D’s on this issue is probably not as concrete. Many have the same conflicted feelings we all do (if not even more tightly held). Many (legal immigrants) are strongly against illegal immigration reforms held by the D’s because “we had to follow the rules so should they” and many others in the legal queue will say the same.
Immigration is one of those issues that there are just no completely “good” options and people across parties can (and do) hold varying opinions (of course, there are definitely strong stereotype positions that hold some weight in the respective parties). I mean, look at Bush. On this topic he wasn’t bad and actually had decent views (of course he never would have pursued them or gotten his caucus to implement them, but the man himself was always good, and on record, about this issue).
The only reason D’s win on this issue, again, is because they hit the R’s where they can’t help themselves – saying, racist, ugly, xenophobic shit thus further cementing themselves as the “white male party and the rest of you can just f*ck off and die”.
AxelFoley
There’s no way America will elect a black man President.
Wait, what?
;)