Congress Reconsiders Comprehensive Immigration Reform

by Austin Evers, Editor at Large

Recently, more than 300 people were aggressively rounded up by immigration agents in a raid of a Massachusetts factory and summarily transferred to detention centers in Texas—including an infant United States citizen who was hospitalized for dehydration suffered while in detention.

This incident arose in the context of a broader debate over immigration policy, and while Congress did not pass comprehensive reform last year, immigration is reemerging as a hot button issue.  The reemerging debate is forming along familiar lines with politicians and think tanks once again advocating border security and various citizenship options. 

According to recent report released by the nonpartisan Drum Major Institute (DMI), many of these prescriptions are probably best understood as attempts to address the underlying economic and social insecurities at the heart of the debate.  To ensure that these insecurities are actually addressed, DMI advocates putting American middle class interests first, which they argue does not include mass deportations, an armed border, or formalizing an immigrant underclass of workers.

DMI approaches possible immigration reforms from an understanding that immigration policy should focus on ensuring that America will not be stripped of the benefits it receives from its foreign workforce and on addressing immigrant exploitation by guaranteeing foreign workers the labor protections enjoyed by all Americans.  If achieved, they argue that these goals have the potential to touch the lives of every American by strengthening the middle of the economy, conforming to the ideals of fairness and welcomeness, abandoning xenophobia, and reducing the likelihood of another raid like the one in Massachusetts.

This framework is also useful for evaluating the state of the immigration debate as it reemerges.  On Monday, March 21, for example, Congressmen Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) introduced a bill into the House largely modeled after the Kennedy-McCain proposal from last year.  The bill would allow illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. before June 2006 to apply for temporary work visas.  After six years, visa holders could seek citizenship provided that they pay a fine and back taxes, pass background checks, learn English, and keep a clean record.  The bill would also guarantee visa holders the same labor protections enjoyed by Americans to ensure that employers cannot rely on intimidation in order to pay immigrants less.

Senator Kennedy (D-MA) has indicated that he will also reintroduce his immigration plan, the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, possibly without the support of Senator McCain (R-AZ).  Kennedy’s bill failed last year in part because of a lack of support in the House, but the new bipartisan House bill sponsored by Reps. Gutierrez and Flake may signal that this obstacle has been removed.  The potential for a congressional investigation into the Massachusetts raid may also move the debate forward. 

At the moment, immigration reform appears poised for another round in the legislative grinder.  And while the issue may receive different treatment this time around, it remains charged with the same emotional and political power as always.  This power–reflected in the arguments of middle class advocates like DMI and in incidents like the Massachusetts raid–reveals that the true heart of the immigration debate is the very real effects policy has on working families and immigrants.


Written By:Matt Browner-Hamlin On March 30, 2007 1:08 PM

I think the tact for analyzing US immigration policy espoused by DMI makes tremendous sense in that it preserves what makes America strong (openness, fairness) while seeking to grow the American economy within lawful boundaries.

While debate on immigration has focused largely on criminal issues, thanks to the work of nativists like Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter, the policy discussions on their terms lacks a recognition of the lives it effects. Destroying families, even the families of illegal immigrants, should never be a byproduct of federal policies. I hope that DMI, Kennedy, and Gutierrez are able to shift the discussion in a sensible, humane direction.

Written By:My DMI comments On March 30, 2007 3:20 PM

What a wonderful fantasy world DMI and this site inhabit, in which we can put a huge flashing "WE GIVE AMNESTY" sign above the U.S., and then end illegal immigration and not have to conduct any more workplace raids.

More on their study at the link.

Written By:Blair On March 30, 2007 3:33 PM

To avoid separating parents from children, the United States should amend the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States." Granting automatic citizenship only to citizens born, at home or abroad, to American citizens would bring U.S. immigration policy into line with the rest of the world, including Mexico.

As the Baby Boom begin to retire, our labor shortage will grow more acute. We need to streamline the immigration process for immigrants who want to stay in the United Sates and a guest worker program for immigrants who want to work in the United States but eventually return to their home countries.

We should require industries that want to hire guest workers to subsidize housing for them. A single male worker whose primary goal is to earn money to supporting his family back home might perfer living in a domitory or even a barracks environment.

First, we need a more accurate estimate of how many guest workers we actually need. (The line of job apllicants streached for blocks at some plants that put up "Help Wanted" signs to replace undocumented immigrants hauled away during immigration raids. Other plants increase wages to fill slots vacated by undocmented workers.

Written By:Julie On April 4, 2007 6:45 PM

For a summary of the STRIVE Act, see: http://flake.house.gov/UploadedFiles/STRIVE%20Summary.pdf.

Post A Comment / Question






Remember personal info?