The Politics of Immigration Weekly Round-up: 11/12 – 11/16

When you say that the sky is falling, it sure helps if you are working like mad to tear it down.  Those in the press and punditry who point to immigration reform as a Democrat-slaying issue are hoping their words become a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Certainly, for most Republicans, the strategy of making immigration a toxic electoral issue is clear, but some Democrats and many in the press are taking the bait, too.

Take the Democratic debate a couple of weeks ago and the return engagement last night in Las Vegas.  In the race to poison immigration, the pundit class fixated on Sen. Clinton getting in trouble for her answer about driver’s licenses for the undocumented.  Never mind that Obama had stated a more controversial position, given the aftermath of New York, and he did not make a headline.  The problem was not immigration – Clinton got attacked for how she handled her answer.  But that is not nearly as exciting, so… 

Last night, in Nevada, Wolf Blitzer took the bait: He asked the candidates to pretend that comprehensive immigration reform could not happen – something all candidates in one form or another have said they support and would work to get done – and instead asked them to focus on a small slice of policy that is outside the realm of the Oval Office and would do nothing to address the issue of immigration. 

“Conventional wisdom” is that talking about immigration is doom.  Well, perhaps it’s more “conformist wisdom,” since we have been hearing that immigration is the next big Republican wedge issue for at least three years and on Election Day for three years, it has failed to deliver.  Nobody makes the mistake of addressing Jerry Kilgore as Governor of Virginia, Randy Graf as a Congressman from Arizona, or J.D. Hayworth and Rick Santorum as anything but ex-government officials.  All ran hard on attacking immigration and all lost, as have many others who have gone down that road.

Not only have voters generally rejected political pandering on this issue, they still support a solution that includes legalizing hard-working undocumented immigrants in poll after poll after poll, Rep. Tancredo’s exploding bombs in his ads notwithstanding.  

Latino voters are particularly sensitive to how this issue is handled by candidates and are rightly concerned.  While there is growing clarity on where Republicans stand, they are still trying to figure out what Democrats are trying to do.  Will they lead, or will they conform to the status quo?  In the last two weeks, the progressive blogosphere has increasingly added their voices to this concern.  <?xml:namespace prefix = o /><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><?xml:namespace prefix = o />

Read on for the weekly round up on the politics of immigration…

In the News

Though all evidence suggests that immigration has been a losing issue for the GOP in the last two elections, this week David Broder warns of the The Icebergs Ahead For the Democrats:

“As the Democratic presidential race finally gets down to brass tacks, two issues are becoming paramount. But only one of them is clearly on the table.

That is the issue of illegal immigration. A very smart Democrat, a veteran of the Clinton administration, told me that he expects it to be a key part of any Republican campaign and that he is worried about his party's ability to respond. I think he has good reason to worry.

The failure of the Democratic Congress, like its Republican predecessor, to enact comprehensive immigration reform, including improved border security, has left individual states and local communities to struggle with the problem. Some are showing a high degree of tolerance and flexibility. Others are being more punitive. But all of them are running into controversy.”

Immigration made an appearance a few weeks ago at the last Democratic debate. With Governor Spitzer’s recent decision to shelve his proposal for drivers’ licenses for undocumented immigrants, and Hillary Clinton’s announcement that she “does not support drivers’ licenses for undocumented people,” all eyes will be on Las Vegas as the Democrats head west for another debate:

“Yesterday, in an attempt to neutralize one possible threat at the debate, her campaign announced that Mrs. Clinton would not support driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants as president. It is the latest formulation of her position, which has shifted since it became a tripping point in the last televised debate on Oct. 30.”

New York Times, In Las Vegas, Chance for Clinton to Undo Damage, November 15, 2007

“The major Democratic contenders' debate takes place in a crucial early-voting caucus state where illegal immigrants are a major concern. Yet Democratic campaigns aren't jumping at the chance to highlight immigration. They're more eager to emphasize issues that they think are higher on their voters' agendas, notably health care, education, the war on terrorism and the economy.

Democratic campaigns also are calculating that once the party nominations are decided, probably early next year, their party's detailed, comprehensive approaches to giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship will look good next to Republicans' demands simply to get ultratough with anyone who's in the country illegally.”

Seattle Times, Dems tread lightly on immigration, November 15, 2007

As things heat up in the GOP presidential primaries, demagoguery, fear-mongering and political pandering has become the strategy of choice for many of the Republican contenders. Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have continued to run from their more moderate stances on immigration by battling each other to become the toughest sounding candidate on immigration:

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani used a campaign stop here Wednesday to talk tough on illegal immigration - and to return a jab at one of his top Republican rivals.

Giuliani took former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney to task over the issue by charging that Romney "probably has the worst record on illegal immigration."

Giuliani was responding to comments by Romney in western Iowa on Tuesday that Giuliani allowed tuition breaks for illegal immigrants at City University of New York while he was mayor of New York City.

Des Moines Register, Giuliani returns jab at Romney, November 15, 2007

Meanwhile, Fred Thompson has taken to the airwaves with a new ad to bolster his image as tough on immigration:

 “It's a big day for political TV ads, and in the case of Fred Thompson, he's got great timing. On the same day Rudy Giuliani releases his first TV ad, and the day Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D-N.Y.) decides to withdraw his plan to give illegal immigrants access to driver's licenses, the former Tennessee senator releases a 30-second spot called, "No Amnesty." It starts airing across Iowa today.

In a style similar to his previous ad, we once again see Thompson in a non-descript diner/restaurant, and he speaks directly to the camera.

"Americans know we have an illegal immigration problem. And most of us have a good idea about how to start fixing it -- secure our borders, and enforce the law," he says, adding "giving up, by granting amnesty is not the answer. It's unfair to those who have played by the rules and ignores the rule of law. It's also a matter of national security."

Not to be outdone, Tom Tancredo proves once again that fear-mongering and scapegoating are his top talents on the campaign trail. This week he launched an ad that has been described by most news outlets as evoking fears of 9/11 and terrorism.  See Associated Press, Tancredo Ad Invokes Terror, Immigrants, November 14, 2007.

On the Blogs

The Progressive Blogosphere weighs in on immigration… and vs. Rahm:

A Progressive Plan for Immigration Reform, Duke1676 of DailyKos

After years of controversy and partisan infighting, we appear today no closer to any meaningful new national immigration policy than we were over six years ago when President Bush first claimed he would make it a priority upon taking office. Much of the blame for this situation clearly rests on the shoulders of the President and his party, who during six years of essentially unopposed control of government, failed to reach any acceptable compromise. But, there have also been divisions within the Democratic Party that have helped stall the effort.

Blue America—Holding Rahm Accountable, Firedoglake

“A few weeks ago Democratic Party insiders under the aegis of the DCCC held a training session in Chicago for a couple dozen of their favored candidates. Afterwards several of the participants, disgusted, let Blue America know that Rahm Emanuel delivered an ominous message demanding that they “move to the right” on immigration.

And yet Emanuel’s own North Side Chicago district is one of the nation’s most immigrant-friendly districts. It always has been. And Emanuel never tires of telling the immigrant communities that he is their best friend. They don’t believe him because his actions– and his inactions– speak far louder than his words.

Starting today, Blue America is teaming up with Illinois’ largest immigrants’ rights coalition, the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, to help bring a little accountability into the life of Mr. Emanuel.”

Rahm Emmanuel—The Tom Tancredo of the Democratic Party, Down with Tyranny

“Yesterday's L.A. Times carries another example of how electing low life political hacks-- rather than statesmen-- to Congress insures that difficult, thorny problems don't really get tackled in a serious way. The story is subtitled Some think the party can toughen its image on illegal immigration without straying from traditional positions. That would be the penultimate congressional non-statesman, and hack without parallel, Rahm Emanuel (D-IL).”

Is Rahm racist, or merely scared? Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos

“So we won, didn't we? Not according to Rahm and the either bigoted or scared contingent in the House that is ready to -- once again and demonstrably so -- be on the wrong side of the American public on this issue.

Americans don't want hate-based anti-immigration rhetoric and action, they want comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders and provides a path to citizenship for the millions of undocumented immigrants in this country.

Yet there's Rahm, with a big chunk of the Democratic caucus, making common cause with racist Tom Tancredo.

The Latino vote is volatile. It swings. And Democrats can't afford to lose 10 percent of their margin over stupidity like this.”

 Moving the Ball, Digby of Hullabaloo

“Far be it for the Democratic Congress to look beyond Stan Greenberg's suspect focus groups of the moment and insist on passing comprehensive immigration reform, which is supported by Latinos and virtually everyone else. Instead they tell Democrats to pass harsh, enforcement only legislation that will only help Republicans. If they gave more than five minutes attention to trying to figure out ways to gain new voters, like unmarried women and Latinos, instead of fighting the Republicans over every cranky white guy who left the party in 1980 and never looked back, they could actually "move the ball" down the field in their direction for a change.

Far be it for the Democratic Congress to try to build a real majority for the long term so that there is a chance of enacting a real progressive agenda. Can't have that. Plutocrats don't want that, which is why every single time a populist wave threatens, somebody starts waving a shiny nativist distraction in people's faces.”