Immigration
After years of being shoved under the carpet, an immigration brouhaha has rather suddenly descended onto the national scene, and I find myself without a sturdy set of opinions to rest on. I spent years working in a diner kitchen alongside illegal immigrants. I've also known a fair number of immigrants who went through the long process this country requires for legal status. I do legal work for soldiers who were motivated to join the military because it can significantly expedite the citizenship process.
This country prides itself on being a nation of immigrants, and there are countless historical iterations of the cycle wherein immigrants come to America, establish themselves, and then throw stones at the next group that dare attempt follow the same path, be it the Irish, the Chinese, or the Eastern Europeans. But how does that translate to the specific issues at hand? I just don't know.
President Bush is in a tough spot, because his party seems more fractured on this issue than any other, and fractured right down to the base, amongst party loyalists who can usually be counted on to set aside their differences this close to an election. The President's ability to lead has been further weakened by his poll numbers and by the incentive potential 2008 candidates have to swing to the extremes on this issue to curry favor with the base voters who control the primaries.
Adding to the problem is that there is little agreement as to what the real problem is. Is the problem the fluid border, posing as many questions about national security as immigration? Is it the effect that illegal immigrants have on employment opportunities for U.S. citizens? Is it the burden illegal immigrants place on social services provided by taxpayers? Different answers to these questions lead to different priorities in solving "the immigration problem."
So the complex issue facing politicians is twofold: what is the real problem that needs to be solved, and how should we solve it? It seems to me that half of the opposition to President Bush's proposals are that they are the wrong solutions addressed at the correct problem. But half of the opposition does not think the President is even targeting the real problem at hand. It's going to be well nigh impossible to reconcile those positions.
It almost leads me to wonder whether the issue could be resolved by the center, a la the Kadima/Labor coalition in Israel, with Democrats and moderate Republicans providing the necessary support for a compromise plan endorsed by the President. I say "almost" because there are only so many times we moderates can rest our hopes on a centrist compromise without getting rather cynical.
And this is, after all, an election year. I don't see how a hard drive to the center will help the Republicans much, unless it boosts the President's poll numbers enough to keep him from dragging down the ticket. That said, I'm not really sure how this immigration issue plays out well for Republicans in 2006 in any case, since any solution seems destined to alienate a good chunk of the party loyalists. Perhaps it will shift some focus from Iraq, however, and that is probably a good thing considering the poll numbers right now.
UPDATE: Maybe I was being too cynical. The Senate just rejected Sen. Isakson's attempt to require that national security issues be resolved before any other immigration reform move forward, and it did so on a 55-40 vote. Those numbers don't sound unusual with the present makeup of the Senate, but look closer at that majority: 36 Democrats, 18 Republicans, and one Independent. I'm sure some of the votes were skewed by the proximity of re-election for particular senators, but the result makes me think a centrist position might be holding steady for now. I doubt any bill will emerge from the House/Senate conference in such good shape, but who knows?
