Failure to pass immigration bill a sign of gridlock to come
Bush, Congress unlikely to pass major legislation


By Jill Zuckman
Washington Bureau

June 29, 2007, 6:57 PM CDT

WASHINGTON -- Congress' dramatic failure this week to reach consensus on immigration reform is almost certainly a harbinger of what's not to come: major legislative accomplishments through the end of President Bush's term.

The House and Senate are sharply divided, and Bush, his popularity low, is mired in lame-duck status. Congress typically becomes dormant during a presidential election year, and bipartisan cooperation will likely slide further out of reach in 2008 on everything from energy to education to retirement to health care legislation.

Few issues showcase this paralysis as much as immigration reform, which has become the new third rail of politics - touch it and you die, the saying goes. Illegal immigrants have become a lightning rod for impassioned discontent in some quarters, making it increasingly difficult for politicians to find common ground without risking the retribution of voters.

Public opinion polling shows voters are increasingly concerned about the problem, worrying that immigrants are taking jobs and straining government services. Overwhelmingly, they oppose efforts to make it easier for undocumented immigrants to become citizens, but they are split on other potential remedies. The bill that died Thursday had support from just 30 percent of Americans, recent polls showed.

Congress, a representative body, reflects the sentiments of its constituents, especially its most vocal ones, and the immigration measure was doomed in large part by a well-organized grassroots campaign by angry opponents. If the immigration bill had not failed in the Senate, it was surely doomed in the House.

"It touched a nerve, and the shock of it shot right through the Senate," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "It lit up the switchboards here for weeks, and ignited a debate that strained our normal alliances here and at home in our states."

Even while fights over issues like gay rights, abortion and gun control may be losing some of their energy, in part because Democratic leaders have softened their more purist stands, immigration seems to be moving to center stage to fill that role of flashpoint for the nation's emotional debates over its identity.

Ironically, both sides of the debate agree that the nation's immigration system is irreparably broken, with porous borders posing a national security threat and 12 million undocumented immigrants living inside the United States with an uncertain future.

"There's a consensus on the problem, but no consensus on the solution," said Gary Jacobson, a political scientist at the University of California San Diego. "Congress has a hard time dealing with issues where public divisions are strong and there isn't any sign of a public consensus on any particular solution."

The issue divided both parties, with Republican opponents the most adamantly against the immigration compromise as they labeled it an "amnesty" bill that undermined the rule of law. Business-oriented Republicans have been much more in favor of accommodating immigrants than cultural conservatives, straining the GOP coalition.

On the Democratic side, many objected to the bill's provision that would have given preference to skilled workers when awarding visas, at the expense of reuniting families.

Supporters of the measure, meanwhile, could not match the opponents' intensity; even its creators called it an imperfect compromise.

"In the world of politics, it was a heavy lift," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the assistant Democratic leader, using a term for a tough legislative task. "It was a complicated challenge that was very controversial. It was easy for its critics to exploit."

It did not help that Bush, who made the issue a centerpiece of his domestic agenda, is at the end of his term in office and at the lowest point in his popularity.

"In days gone by, when a president had a tough vote, he'd say, 'If you vote with me, I'll come out to your district and help you get reelected.' These days, very few if any members of Congress want the president anywhere near their districts," Durbin said.

For Bush, the legislative loss promises future disappointments during his remaining time in the White House. Congressional Republicans abandoned him on his plan to partially privatize Social Security, they abandoned him on immigration and now they are beginning to peel away from him on the war in Iraq.

There is virtually no hope that in the remaining year and a half of his presidency Bush will be able to push major policy proposals through Congress and into law.

Certainly, with the wounds from the immigration debate still so fresh, Congress will not be able to return to the issue until 2009 at the earliest. In fact, it may take a new president, with a mandate from the voters, to tackle the intractable issue. And it's far from clear that a newly elected president would have any interest in jumping into so volatile an issue.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), who has served in the Senate since 1962, took a long-term view, telling reporters that despite immigration reform's bleak prospects in the near future, the most difficult issues often require years of work.

Kennedy recalled that in 1980, he and his allies fell short of votes to pass housing non-discrimination legislation. But just a few years later, the bill passed easily, with expanded prohibitions against housing discrimination on the basis of race, disability or even children.

"We will be back. This issue is not going away," said Kennedy. "And we will ultimately be successful. This is really a part of the whole march for progress for our nation and the country."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati ... ?track=rss