Saturday, April 2, 2011

Immigration

Border double-crossings: Comprehensive immigration reform once had the support of a few Republicans. Without it, the nation is stuck with the default plan, massive new spending on border security, which would yield only diminishing returns.
Lawmakers need to be honest about problems and solutions. Federal funding for immigration enforcement, including securing the border, is at an all-time high. Spending rose from $8.5 billion in 2005 to nearly $16.2 billion this year. The number of Border Patrol agents has increased from 12,348 in 2006 to more than 21,000 in 2011. The Obama administration has quadrupled the number of employer audits, fining businesses $6.9 million in 2010 for hiring illegal immigrants, up from a mere $675,000 in 2008. And nearly 400,000 immigrants were deported last year. 
The massive allocation of funds and troops, along with high U.S. joblessness, which makes border crossing less appealing, has had a significant impact. Border Patrol arrests dropped from 1.13 million in 2004 to just over 447,700 in 2010, an indication that fewer migrants are trying to cross illegally. Now Republican lawmakers are calling for more funding for new fencing, more sensors, more agents and even drones, in what they say is an effort to deter every single illegal crossing. At this point, however, massive new spending on border security would yield diminishing returns. 
The fact is, the immigration system is broken, and we can neither deport our way out of the problem nor vacuum-seal the borders with Mexico and Canada. Comprehensive reform that addresses not just the border but also the workplace and the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living in this country remains the best hope for success. Until Republicans like Flake and McCain go back to thinking about real solutions, and put reform back on the legislative agenda, the problems will continue.
A wedge issue that's losing its point
Most significant, there's increasing evidence that a growing number of Americans favor comprehensive immigration reform that involves increased enforcement, some sort of regulated flow of workers across the border, and a path to citizenship for immigrants already here without papers. A Times/USC poll conducted shortly before the midterm election found that 59% of likely California voters felt that undocumented immigrant workers should be given a way to regularize their legal status; 48% said the state benefits from immigrants' presence. 
The survey found that nearly 60% of respondents younger than 45 felt immigrants are a benefit to California and 68% feel they should be able to keep their jobs. In other words, opinion on immigration may be shifting in much the same way that it has on same-sex marriage: Younger Americans no longer accept the orthodoxies that once made both questions such divisive wedge issues. 
Last month, for example, a Washington Post/ABC poll found that 53% of Americans now believe that same-sex marriage should be legalized. Like many such surveys, a recent nonpartisan Pew Research Center poll found that approval is strongest among younger voters. Similarly, a study in September by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life found that 51% of Americans under 30 believe that "immigrants work hard" and "are not a burden," while 65% think they "strengthen society" and "don't threaten American values." 
In other words, two once-powerful political wedges appear to be crumbling because Americans, who for most of their lives have lived and worked alongside openly gay and lesbian people and immigrants, have drawn conclusions from experience rather than fanciful rhetoric. 
There's something hopeful in that.

No comments: