Why Gutierrez' immigration reform plan has no chance

http://www.suntimes.com/news/cepeda/1950288,guiterrez-reform-plan-esther-cepeda-122109.article

Gutierrez' reform plan has no chance

December 21, 2009

BY ESTHER J. CEPEDA

To give you an idea of how much impact Rep. Luis Gutierrez' immigration reform proposal made on the national agenda when he debuted it last Tuesday, this is the number of White House press corps questions asked on the subject at that day's press briefing:

None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

The attention was on the President Obama's health-care meeting with the Senate and Illinois' Thomson prison -- the so-called "Illinois Gitmo" -- and what to do with those other pesky foreigners, with a few questions on climate-change talks in Copenhagen, a few on Iran's nuclear intentions and even an inquiry about an obscure Hawaiian government reorganization act that might get attached to the Pentagon spending measure.

But not a single question -- or comment from the White House press secretary -- regarding that day's immigration law reform proposal.

Yep, immigration reform, a topic the Obama administration vowed as recently as April would get much-needed attention -- and possibly a proposal for a comprehensive overhaul -- in 2009.

So why did the nation's news editors and the elite White House press corps completely ignore Gutierrez' proposal?

Because there isn't a snowball's chance for a plan to allow 12 million illegal immigrants to waltz out of the shadows and into the open arms of a United States that is breaking under the weight of 10 percent unemployment.

Hey, you can't blame Gutierrez for trying -- there are plenty of productive, nonviolent illegal immigrants who would be a tremendous asset to this country and should be allowed to make it better -- but he picked the wrong time and the wrong tactic.

There's never a bad time to figure out how to treat humanely people already illegally living in our country, but some moments are better than others. Now, as the White House deals with the economy, unemployment, health care, climate change, Afghanistan and about a million other things, is definitely not the best time.

What the Obama administration is doing at the moment is bending over backward to combine special humanitarian deportation exemptions -- i.e., star UIC student and DUI offender Rigo Padilla -- with a comprehensive worksite enforcement strategy and reforms to the sometimes horrifying immigration detention system. The idea is to demonstrate progress.

To the chagrin of some immigrant advocacy organizations, these efforts indicate that the issue does enjoy priority status in certain measurable ways and dilutes the "us-vs.-them narrative" that whipped up such a passion during the George W. Bush years.

Then there's Gutierrez' actual proposal: purposely dependent on mass legalization, lacking a temporary-worker program, and leaving completely unanswered the million-dollar question of how this plan is significantly different from the amnesty of the 1980s, popularly believed to have been the precursor to the massive influx of illegal immigrants that sparked an angry and frustrated backlash -- the "send them all home" Sensenbrenner Bill of 2005.

Gutierrez is right to push the reform envelope, but he must go back to the drawing board. And while he's there, here's my advice: Forget the prayer vigils and the sob stories and instead talk to people about this country's economic progress. If interested parties want to see productive, pragmatic -- and therefore humane -- immigration law reform come to pass, they need to break out the business case. Let's see the numbers. Get a truly bipartisan panel into a room with a team of statistical analysts tasked with creating an unbiased accounting of the costs and benefits of legalization.

Weigh in all the factors that scare the bejeezus out of the detractors -- increased education and health-care costs -- add in all the benefits we'd supposedly gain, like young, hardworking U.S.-loving citizens. Then make the airtight business case required to either propose a reform that actually has a chance of passing or relegate the whole thing to the waiting room until -- as one keen observer put it -- "the last unemployed American finds a job."

 

Comments

[Chuck]

This sounds like stunningly good advice to me. Maybe I am in a left-brain minority of rationalists, but I would listen to the economic rationale.

[laprofe63]

What I wanna know is how many undocumented workers/illegal aliens have lost their jobs in the past year or two? Did many? Some may have, and maybe even had to return home. But I'd bet that many didn't. Low wages and exploitative working conditions are near guarantees of continued employment in the capitalist system! In fact, an Employee of the Month Award may be more appropriate!

I guess what I'm really saying is that, seen from a different perspective, now may not really be the time they want to come out of the closet, so to speak, and into the legal labor force where things aren't looking too good.

[Reylc]

While I am no fan of Luis "Payday Loan" Gutierrez's tactics, I don't see him getting much traction with a boring-to-tears business case (airtight or otherwise). Do you really think the anti-immigrant crowd is going to magically cave to the voice of reason. If you haven't noticed there are already numerous studies proving both that undocumented immigrants will take in more resources and take in less resources than they contribute. Don't get me wrong a bi-partisan study couldn't hurt, but it's not likely to sway anyone other than a few policy-wonks and thoughtful bloggers. Most people have their mind made up when it comes to the legalization of the 12 million.

You're a journalist--are well-reasoned arguments going to trump sexy emotional outbursts that will look great on the front page? Are you saying that sob stories don't influence the general public or even journalists more than reasoned arguments do? When's the last time the Tribune posted a flow chart of ideas showing the soundness of an argument on its front page?

Which moment is better for reform? If you think its when we have zero unemployment, then why bother even arguing about any legislation--there will NEVER be such a moment. That's not how the economy works.