America is...

I totally got my arse handed to me today by a random woman from California who called to yell at me and let me know that I have no idea about immigration or the quote-unquote 'mexicans invading the country' and that, among other things, I must not have any idea about what America stands for. Well friends, nothing is ever as easy as it seems and standing by the mantra 'what part of illegal don't you understand' doesn't solve anything.

Tamar Jacoby has been writing about immigration and race relations for quite some time now. She writes often for the Wall Street Journal and has written a few books. She's terribly smart and thoughtful. The article below was printed in the Wall Street Journal last week.

Immigration Countdown
April 20, 2007

By Tamar Jacoby

Will Congress actually pass immigration reform this year? The debate these days is not only about policy. While there are still critical issues to be decided, the surprising news is that key Democrats and Republicans increasingly agree on the outlines of what needs to be done. What could hold them, and the country, back, is the politics of the 2008 elections.

In contrast to last year, when there really were two starkly different visions of immigration reform on the table, members of both parties are coalescing. Senators who are otherwise polar opposites, especially Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) and Ted Kennedy (D., Mass.), now agree on a fundamental tenet: Enforcement alone is not enough. Both men recognize immigration laws must be enforced on the border and in the workplace. But they agree that this must be accompanied by more worker visas, and a practical answer for the 12 million illegal immigrants already here.

This is what people mean by "comprehensive" reform: It is what President Bush has long argued for, and it is what, as poll after poll shows, most voters have come to see as the best option. Depending on the survey, between 60% and 85% of the public understands that we can't solve the problem of illegal immigration without dealing with the illegal immigrants already in the country, and that the best way to deal with them is to allow them to earn citizenship over time.

Sens. Kyl and Kennedy still disagree sharply about the terms of a comprehensive bill. What exactly should illegal immigrants have to do to earn citizenship? Should workers who come in the future be strictly temporary or would they be allowed under some conditions to assimilate and stay permanently? Perhaps most important, how many visas, short- and long-term, are needed to meet our economic needs through legal rather than illegal immigration.

The two men are working hard to arrive at a compromise. First on a partisan basis and now together, a small group of Republicans and Democrats have been meeting privately two or three times a week for several weeks. This is unusual for Washington; ordinarily senators let their staffs sweat the details, so these meetings are a measure of how badly these legislators want to reach a consensus. The White House shares their urgency and has been helping drive the talks forward.

But the bigger question is whether the political climate leaves room for an agreement as we head into what may be one of the most contested presidential elections of our lifetime.

Both parties are deeply divided on that question—divided between members of Congress who want to get to a deal this year and those who would rather exploit the issue in 2008. Think of it as the battle between the dealmakers and the blame-gamers. Just as there are would-be dealmakers in both parties—Sens. Kennedy and Kyl are merely the most prominent —so there are a good number of equally powerful blame-gamers: Democrats relishing the prospect of GOP presidential candidates looking obstructionist as they scratch each other's eyes out over immigration, Republicans already writing the campaign spots that pillory Democrats as the "Amnesty Party." For every member eager to pass reform, there's another who would rather see it fail and then point fingers. And for every member struggling to find the sweet spot in the back room, there's another waiting outside the room to say the deal's not good enough—to tell Sens. Kyl and Kennedy that they've compromised too far and that it makes more political sense to hold off for a couple of years to pass a bill.

Which camp is likely to prevail? In part, it depends on the back-room talks. If Democrats and Republicans can find their way to agree on an overhaul that genuinely solves the problem while taking account of both sides' fundamental principles, then it will be that much harder for the naysayers to shoot them down.

But there's also another factor—another player—that could be decisive. And that's the public, frustrated by the broken status quo and hungry to see Congress get something done. I know: I've heard them firsthand in recent months in focus groups and other forums around the country. Employers who can't find enough workers to grow their businesses. Latinos with friends or family living in the shadows. Ordinary voters increasingly angry that Washington can't solve the problem. These voters may just grow so impatient that even the most calculating members of Congress have no choice but to come through with results.

It may sound like a long shot; it's easy to be cynical about Washington. But sometimes even politics as usual has to give way to that other kind of politics—the politics of what voters want.

Time is running out. Congress probably has until August at the latest before presidential politics utterly rule out any deal. But it's too soon to give up hope. There's still a chance that the dealmakers will outrun the blame-gamers—that the two parties will come together around a workable bill that solves the problem rather than go on playing political football with one of the most important issues we face.

---

Tamar Jacoby is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

©2007 The Wall Street Journal