Thread: The Issue the Democrats Dread

The Issue the Democrats Dread
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Friday, November 2, 2007; A21

More significant than Hillary Clinton's supposed gaffe at the end of Tuesday's Democratic presidential debate is the subject around which she tiptoed so delicately: immigration. Democrats fear the issue because it could leave them with a set of no-win political choices.

Examined on its face, Clinton's statement on New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's proposal to let illegal immigrants obtain driver's licenses was careful and reasonable.

While acknowledging that current law on immigration is inadequate, she defended Spitzer's idea by noting that if illegal immigrants are going to drive anyway, licensing them would protect all drivers.

Yet Clinton eventually cut into the debate to amend her statement: "I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done." Her opponents jumped all over her. John Edwards accused her of saying "two different things in the course of about two minutes."

In the short run, Clinton's exquisite calibration of her positions was the issue. But her debate dance reflects a deeper worry among Democrats that Republicans are ready to use impatience with illegal immigration to win back voters dissatisfied with the broader status quo.

The issue is especially problematic because efforts to appease voters upset about immigration -- including a share of the African American community -- threaten to undercut the Democrats' large and growing advantage among Latino voters. For Republicans, the issue is both a way of changing the political subject from Iraq, the economy and the failures of the Bush presidency and a means of sowing discord in the Democratic coalition.

One poll finding this week that shook Democrats came in a survey conducted by Democracy Corps, a consortium organized by party consultants Stan Greenberg, Al Quinlan and James Carville. It asked voters to pick two from a list of seven problems that explain "why the country is going in the wrong direction."

The survey found that among independent voters, 40 percent -- by far the largest group -- picked this option: "Our borders have been left unprotected and illegal immigration is growing."

By contrast, a lack of action on health care was named by only 24 percent of independents as a core problem, and Iraq by 23 percent.

The Democracy Corps poll, along with a Pew Research Center survey released this week, found Democrats with substantial advantages over Republicans on a variety of measures. But many Democrats fear that the more trouble Republicans are in, the more they will be willing to use immigration to attempt a comeback.

This has created serious tensions among congressional Democrats. Rep. Rahm Emanuel, the House Democratic Caucus chairman, has risked the ire of Latino groups by warning that the party must deal with concerns about illegal immigration.

"The debate to date has been a debate about corporate interests, [agriculture], the tourist industry and advocates of immigrants," he said in a telephone interview yesterday. "This is a debate in which the rest of America is left out.

"This is a values issue: How does a superpower not have control over its border? You have to enforce the rule of law as it relates to the border, and you have to enforce the rule of law as it relates to benefits. Then the American people will be open to resolving the issue as it relates to what industry needs and what immigrant advocates need."

But Latino groups are alarmed that even benefits for legal immigrants are in jeopardy. For example, some immigrant children and pregnant women were excluded from help under the recently passed State Children's Health Insurance Program expansion that Bush vetoed.

And the carefully drawn Dream Act, which focused on legalizing the status of high school graduates who are under 30 and were brought into the country as children by their parents, failed to secure enough votes to pass in the Senate. This angered Latino groups that saw no reason to deny legal status to successful men and women who are not responsible for their presence in the United States. Such young people, said Janet Murgu¿a, president and chief executive of the National Council of La Raza, should not be asked to "give up their hopes and dreams."

It's absurd that the Dream Act cannot pass, and it's foolish to shortchange legal immigrants on health-care coverage. Yet at a moment when the electorate is very angry, it's not surprising that some voters are channeling their discontent through the immigration issue. It's happened before in our history.

Democrats have to manage their political problem on immigration to have a chance at solving the problem itself. Hillary Clinton is not alone in facing this dilemma.

postchat@aol.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 87_pf.html

Are they finally getting it? Can it be? It's about time!

Woe to the Democrats if ANY amnesty legislation is passed.

This piece comes closer to my concept of the state of the issue than any piece I've read lately.

I take exception to this comment:

"This is a values issue: How does a superpower not have control over its border? You have to enforce the rule of law as it relates to the border, and you have to enforce the rule of law as it relates to benefits. [b]Then the American people will be open to resolving the issue as it relates to what industry needs and what immigrant advocates need."

They still seem to be under the delusion that if they can appease us with a show of enforcement we will accept amnesty for the twelve (twenty? thirty eight?) million already in the country. That premise interjects dishonesty into the debate.

Originally Posted by Nouveauxpoor

This piece comes closer to my concept of the state of the issue than any piece I've read lately.

I take exception to this comment:

"This is a values issue: How does a superpower not have control over its border? You have to enforce the rule of law as it relates to the border, and you have to enforce the rule of law as it relates to benefits. [b]Then the American people will be open to resolving the issue as it relates to what industry needs and what immigrant advocates need."

They still seem to be under the delusion that if they can appease us with a show of enforcement we will accept amnesty for the twelve (twenty? thirty eight?) million already in the country. That premise interjects dishonesty into the debate.

I agree. We will not accept amnesty, and are tired of the false choice between "deporting all of them" or "giving them all amnesty."


_______


Call the Senate: NO AgJOBS Amnesty !

True. But remember when they argued for the amnesty bill, they kept saying we CAN'T possibly deport 12 to 20 million people. Wanna bet?

I agree, and I'm glad to see someone write a responsible article focusing on the Dems and their overall apprehension in dealing with immigration substantively (as opposed to mindless pandering...).

Of course, it would not be fair to lump all Dems in the 'We Want Amnesty' heap. There are several Dem senators, for example, that have rather good voting records on the subject. They tend to be - the freshman class that was elected recently and had to take a public stance that dealt with immigration openly in the election process. (Many senators that have been in office several years conveniently got a 'pass' in never having to talk about the subject except during fleeting floor debates - many of which, get overlooked innocuously).

Of course, there are others like Dorgan, Byrd, etc. that have been in and around Congress for a while and I believe are taking a principled position and not doing so out of a perceived need to please the electorate outright (although, I'm sure that figures in to their stances as well...).

In short: please remember - not all Democrats are BAD, and not all Republicans are GOOD. It is nice to see more Democrats choosing to side with pro-enforcement, and the hardcore OBL group start to shrink (not faster enough of course, but there are changes afoot).

Originally Posted by zeezil

"...what immigrant advocates need."

Latino groups are alarmed that even benefits for legal immigrants are in jeopardy.

This angered Latino groups that saw no reason to deny legal status to successful men and women who are not responsible for their presence in the United States.

This explains why many Democrats are losing big time over illegal immigration, because it puts Latin Americans first, ahead of USA Americans and non-Latin legal immigrants.

These slimey Democrats have bet that supporting racism benefitting the "The Race" will keep them in power! Just like they thought supporting slavery before the Civil War would keep them in power.