Ours To Lose

It is a fallacy to believe that in the incoming 110th Congress, there will be many newly-elected moderates/conservatives in the Democratic caucus. Writing in Roll Call on November 16, 2006, noted political analyst Stuart Rothenberg said "... I met dozens of Democrats running in 2006 - no, not everyone, but most of them - and I can’t find much more than a couple who merit the label "conservative." That’s not meant to be either criticism or praise. It’s merely a statement of fact ... Virtually all of the Democrats I interviewed were pro-choice, favored rolling back President Bush’s tax cuts and sounded traditional Democratic themes on education, the environment and foreign policy ... Now let me be very clear about my point. I’m not saying that it’s good or bad that most of these Democrats are likely to be pretty typical members of their party. I’m only saying that’s where they fit. A bunch of conservative Democrats didn’t win election last week."

The idea that immigration reform prospects early in 2007 must be limited because the Democratic caucus may have too many moderate/conservative Democrats who will resist liberal immigration laws is hogwash. However, there have been numerous press reports since the election which paint a grim picture for rapid progress on significant immigration benefits legislation in the early weeks and months of 2007. Here's why we have had this mis-information campaign.

Immigration lobbyists closely allied with liberal Democrats realize full well that they are now, for the first time since 9/11, on the offense, not defense. They realize full well that they are now on the cusp of enactment of major immigration benefits bills. However, with this new perspective has come hubris. Many of them now think that S. 2611 (the amended McCain-Kennedy bill) which would have granted legalization to 5 million, established significant quota relief for both employment and family immigration, established a modest guest worker program, etc does not go far enough, and is too punitive in its other provisions. In order to increase the reach of legalization, reduce punitive provisions, etc, they are pursuing what is essentially an all-or-nothing strategy. The immigration lobbyists' attitude appears to be that unless they get the original un-amended McCain-Kennedy or better, they would rather have no relief at all for the next several years.

We believe that the window of opportunity on immigration benefits is much smaller than most people think. We need not just a bill, but a conference report, in weeks, not months. Perhaps the memories of divided government have faded inside the Beltway. The last time we had a different party in charge at either end of Pennsylvania Ave (in the Clinton years), we had an ugly political climate, and legislative grid lock. There is every reason to believe that the same might happen again in a few months. Once the new Democratic staff are hired, and once the subpoenas from the new Democratic Chairs start to flow, Washington DC will be all-ugliness all-the-time. Furthermore, when last in the opposition pre-1994, the Republicans proved that they were masters of obstruction (does any immigration lobbyist relish the idea of crossing swords with the master-parliamentarian Mr. Lamar Smith, who will do everything in his power to destroy immigration benefit hopes from his new perch as ranking member of the House Judiciary committee?).The window of opportunity is only a few months (not the many months till the start of the 2008 Presidential season).

We believe it would be more prudent to pursue a limited strategy in early 2007 of obtaining a "down-payment" on comprehensive immigration reform. Perhaps we could just get DREAM, or just move the registry date from 1971 to IRCA's date, or perhaps, Congress could return to the business left unfinished on the morning of 9/11/01, when the House was to have voted on a Senate-passed extension of 245(i). We do not believe that the prospects of comprehensive immigration reform would be in any way damaged by getting a down-payment in hand first (a bird in hand is worth two in the bush). If later, we can get more reform, the immigration champions on the Hill will be heroes. If not, immigration champions will then be able to hold their head up high and say that at least they got something concrete in hand from this historic opportunity now before us.

We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to editor@ilw.com.