What ever happened to immigration reform?
May 16, 2007

Cal Thomas is a conservative columnist. Bob Beckelis a liberal Democratic strategist. But as longtime friends, they can often find common ground on issues that lawmakers in Washington cannot.
Today: Revisiting immigration reform.

Bob: This time last year immigration reform was a hot topic in Washington. The massive protests in major U.S. cities catapulted the issue into an election-year lightning rod. The public still cares deeply about immigration reform, yet the candidates for president in both parties are running from it like scalded dogs. Most of them would just as soon duck the issue until after the election, but immigration reform cannot wait.

Cal: You're right. With 12 million illegal immigrants here now, and more coming every day, time isn't on our country's side.

Bob: Patience in the Latino community is running out, too. The clashes a couple weeks ago during immigration protests in Los Angeles could be a sign that the status quo won't work much longer.

Cal: Don't rely on the politicians to do anything out of conviction, Bob. Those demonstrators included many illegal aliens and their supporters. They demanded we lay aside our laws and grant them full legal status. Don't you find it bizarre that the illegals picked May 1, Law Day, to protest? Some of them are filing lawsuits in our courts to give them a legal status they do not deserve. It's surreal!

Bob: Many court challenges are about splitting immigrant families whose children were born in the USA and are, therefore, citizens. They were born to mothers who came here illegally, but that doesn't change the right for these children and their advocates to go to court. Law Day was the ideal time to make this case. The lawsuits and demonstrations would go away if our elected officials actually did something about our immigration problems.

Cal: Congress' failure to move forward on reform is precisely what is wrong in Washington today, and it's this sort of intransigence that led us to begin this column two years ago. The ingredients are all here: A major immigration problem, an energized and interested public and a president who is advocating reform. What's missing?

Bob: Compromise. I know that closed-door discussions between Senate Democrats and the White House have been moving forward. Bravo to those willing to carry the flag: Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Sens. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa. Despite the beating he takes from conservatives, Kennedy knows when to reach across the aisle. He did it with President Bush on education reform, and he's doing it on immigration. These are big-ticket issues. I also applaud the president for pushing legislation by the end of summer. If the two sides could put aside partisanship on this one critical issue, who knows where it might lead? Compromise on Iraq? On tax policy?

Cal: You had me until tax policy! But really, you're on to something. All we need is an opening, and this could be it. If the politicians would only listen to the public and not the rabble rousers who they think can bring them votes, we'd get there.

Bob: That's exactly what has been happening, too. Congress is cowed by the vocal minority, and therefore, the silent majority isn't represented.

Cal: According to a poll commissioned by the conservative Citizens United, 93% of voters say illegal immigration is a problem facing the USA; 63% call it a "major" problem. And 73% would change the U.S. "birthright citizenship" so that a child born in this country becomes a citizen at birth only if at least one parent is. I was encouraged that about half of Latinos support such a change.

Bob: This isn't the issue before us, Cal. We need to look at the big-picture solutions that will correct our immigration failures for decades to come. This needs to be the legislation that, 30 years from now, we'll be able to look back on and say, "Finally, we got it right."

Cal: I'm all for something getting done, but I want it to be the right something that looks out for the interests of the native-born, the legal immigrants and those who are obeying our laws and waiting in line for citizenship. Lawbreakers should not be allowed to jump to the head of the line.

Bob: No one is proposing a law to push illegals to the front of the line. Such rhetoric from both left and right is what stops reform in its tracks. Last year, we were on the right track. The Senate passed a bill that gave illegals a path to citizenship, and it included fines, back taxes, criminal background checks and an English requirement. It had a guest-worker provision and tougher border security measures. Though it died in the House, it was a good start. What was wrong with that?

Cal: Nothing, though enforcement will be critical. For instance, the 2005 Real ID Act — which could be a key tool in battling illegal immigration — requires every state to issue driver's licenses or ID cards approved by the federal government. The states have to link their ID databases so that someone seeking a license in one state can be background-checked by another. Sounds good, right? Well, seven states have enacted statutes or resolutions opposing Real ID, and Oklahoma might become the eighth. Cost and privacy concerns are at the heart of their opposition. I hope this isn't an indication of the kind of resistance we'll get when, and if, we ever get comprehensive reform.

Bob: I'm no fan of Real ID, but I'm also no fan of states taking over where the federal government is failing. You hear of states and even localities trying to handle immigration issues that are best dealt with by the federal government. That's all we need! If we keep delaying federal legislation, more state laws will follow. So that we don't go that route, let's talk about what a new law should include.

Cal: Be my guest worker.

Bob: First, any illegal immigrant must learn English if they are allowed to stay here. I don't view it as a punitive move, either. Immigrants, particularly children, have a tough time as it is.

Cal: Absolutely. English is essential to functioning in this country, and learning it well will serve the immigrants as well as the rest of us.

Bob: I also think we need to shift the conversation to talk about "amnesty" without it being used as a club in the debate. Republicans who love to invoke the name of Ronald Reagan would do well to follow the Gipper's lead. Reagan signed the last immigration reform bill into law in 1986. Guess what? It provided amnesty — Reagan's word — to 3 million illegal immigrants. That law called for strict border control and sanctions on employers of illegals, but it wasn't adequately enforced. This leads us to today. To his credit, Bush is one Republican who has been a leader on this issue.

Cal: I don't share your praise of the president as a "leader" on immigration reform. We're six years into his term and have no real reform. If anything, his failure to control our southern border has encouraged illegal immigration.

Bob: You know we're approaching common ground when I'm defending President Bush.

Cal: True! But we can't repeat the mistakes of our past, Bob. We'll have 12 million more illegal immigrants soon if we don't do a better job than we did in 1986. Among the illegals here already, an estimated 636,000 are "alien absconders," people who have been ordered deported but refused to go and are in hiding. It makes no sense to try to find and forcibly deport them if we are simultaneously letting more in.

Bob: Trying to send illegal immigrants home will never work, but we have agreement on paying fines and learning English. I favor a guest-worker program, serious efforts to seal the border and going after employers who knowingly hire illegals. Sound good?

Cal: That would be an excellent start. Now if we can just get the politicians to stop thinking about how they can win the votes of the illegals and start thinking about ways to make people obey the laws, we'll be making real progress on this contentious issue — once and for all.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/20 ... htm?csp=34