Immigration Nation: Advocates for Reform Begin to Ramp Up

The inside of a building on Ellis Island, an historical marker of immigration to America. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

During the 2012 Presidential Election, President Obama, in an appeal to the burgeoning Latino voting bloc, spoke often about comprehensive immigration reform. With the election over and other contentious issues, such as gun control, having moved to the backburner, Congress and the White House are finally diving head-first into the debate over immigration

The current push for immigration reform is headed by “The Gang of Eight”, which includes four Republican senators and four Democratic senators. The GOP members are Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). The Democratic side consists of Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) Their goal is to craft a bipartisan bill that would address the 11 million undocumented immigrants living in America, the restrictive visa system which prevents American businesses from hiring foreign workers, border security, and the latest controversial issue, green card sponsorship for same-sex couples.

Senators from both parties agree that there has to be a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, but that it must be to some extent earned through fees, learning English, or other penalties. However, there is much debate on the economic impact of immigration.  Pro-immigration reformers argue that it will create economic growth, secure entitlement programs for future generations, and grow the tax base. The other side claims that the potential influx of new immigrants and citizens would put a strain on the already overly burdened government benefit programs aimed at the impoverished, such as Medicaid.

The latest roadblock on the immigration bill’s path is a provision that would allow foreign partners of same sex couples to become legal permanent citizens. All four of the Republican senators key to a compromise are against this measure, citing the difficulty of selling the immigration bill to the conservative wing of their party without such a controversial issue attached.

The last significant piece of federal immigration legislation was the Immigration Reform and Control Act passed in 1986 under President Ronald Reagan. The bill was a product of over a decade of contentious political debate, and consisted of three main components: tighter security along the Mexican border, stricter penalties for employers who hired undocumented workers, and amnesty for any immigrant who had entered the country before 1982. But despite the law’s goal to stem the flow of illegal immigration to the U.S., the number of unauthorized immigrants has exploded from an estimated 5 million in 1986 to 11.1 million today.

Between 2005 and 2007, further attempts were made to enact immigration reform. In 2005, the House passed the Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. The bill sparked a series of historic immigration reform protests to oppose the House bill and to call for comprehensive immigration legislation and a path for citizenship. In 2006, the Senate passed its own immigration bill titled the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act. The major difference between the House and the Senate versions was the proposed amnesty in the latter bill. Ultimately, the differences between the two could not be reconciled, and both failed in conference committee.

Both inside and outside of Washington, powerful forces are joining together to push for comprehensive immigration reform. Although united in their legislative goal: the passage of the Gang of Eight’s path to citizenship proposal, each politician and organization has its own interests and motivations.

Senator Marco Rubio, a Senate newcomer from Florida, is a supporter of comprehensive immigration reform. The son of Cuban immigrants, Senator Rubio claims to have a more intimate understanding of immigrants’ desires, as well as a certain sympathy for their plight. He is also a likely Republican contender for the 2016 presidential election; critics deride his push for reform as little more than a political maneuver to put himself ahead of fellow contenders for the Republican nomination. Senator McCain, hailing from infamously anti-immigrant Arizona publically stated that the Latino vote is crucial for the Republican Party’s success in future national elections. For Senator Michael Bennet, a Democrat from Colorado, the Latino vote will likely be crucial to his election; in 2011 Colorado’s population was approximately 21% Hispanic, and that number will only rise in coming years.

For the other Democratic members, Senators Dick Durbin, Robert Menendez, and Chuck Schumer, there are similar political motivations. Like Senator Rubio, Senator Menendez is the son of Cuban immigrants, giving him a similar “claim” to the issue of immigration reform. Regardless of what their true motives are, Senate Democrats seem other have the upper hand when it comes to claiming genuine concern for immigrants, thanks to Senator McCain and other Republican leaders’ unfortunate public statements on their party’s need to appeal to Hispanic voters.

In addition to bipartisan support in the House and Senate, as well as the blessing of the White House, citizen groups and business lobbies, especially big agriculture businesses, also back the Gang of Eight’s immigration reform proposal. Moreover, public support for immigration reform is at an all-time high; 63% of Americans support a path to citizenship, up from only 49% when immigration reform failed in 2007.

The chances of this year's immigration bill passing seem better than those of the 2007 bill.  However, a substantial Tea Party Caucus in the House is motivated to oppose any reform, which would mean that for reform to pass, there must be support among virtually all Democrats and moderate Republicans. The Senate must signal significant bipartisan support over the coming weeks as the bill moves through committee. Yet, the co-sponsors of the compromise bill are reasonable in believing the bill can find majority support from both party caucuses in the Senate.

After Hispanics in 2012 shifted 13 percent toward Obama, relative to Kerry in 2004, the talk in Washington is that rapidly growing minority populations who support the Democrats could lead to future electoral domination. Fearful of this outcfome, party elites in the Republican Party embraced the concept of "comprehensive immigration reform." Republicans seek to benefit by placating Hispanic voters and attempting to shed their image as an anti-immigrant force.

On the left, America's unions have dropped their opposition against immigration reform, with the AFL-CIO even entering negotiating with the Chamber of Commerce, a major force on the pro-business right. Whereas the Chamber's business leaders championed reform to fill job shortages with a guest worker program, the unions have come to realize that illegal workers who remain in America toil in low-level jobs, without the benefits of collective bargaining. Such workers could be primed for unionization efforts, which is tenable only if they have legal status in the US. Hence the unions now see reform as a growth strategy, removing a potential left-wing roadblock to reform.

If it is initially difficult for the bill to receive at least 60 votes in the Senate, the bill will not seem bipartisan enough for House members, especially the more conservative Republicans, to have faith in voting for it without electoral backlash. As a group of congressmen inch closer to the necessary level of cooperation needed to move a bill forward, and so long as interest groups supporting both parties do not start to oppose reform, it seems more likely than ever that a comprehensive immigration reform bill will pass and be signed into law this year. Its last hurdle, as always, will be America’s polarized lawmakers.

Further Reading:
Latino Voter Statistics
AFL-CIO and Chamber of Commerce Cooperation
White House Page on Immigration Reform
Tom Cui, Niabi Schmaltz, Alexi Stocker, and Val Zuckerman contributed