Recently both leading presidential candidates have increased their outreach to Latino voters with appearances at various events sponsored by prominent Latino organizations. Not surprisingly, the topics of immigration and immigration reform have played a central role in this outreach effort.
As an issue where both candidates feel they exhibit some strength with Latino voters, they have both attempted to utilize this perceived strength to make inroads into what most believe will be a crucial voting block this coming November.
But what we have received from both candidates thus far are vague promises and pleasant platitudes about "A Nation of Immigrants."
This is a complex issue, and as the history of failed efforts at reform clearly shows, it will take more than quick sound bites and quotes from Emma Lazarus to solve the problems with our failed current immigration system. In order to enact meaningful immigration reform that is practical, rational, fair and most of all humane, tough questions must be answered and problems dealt with.
In the wake of numerous press reports detailing the deaths of 83 people in ICE custody since its inception five years ago, countless cases of sick or mentally ill immigration detainees denied even the most basic care they require, the illegal detention of legal residents and citizens, expedited criminal hearings of those apprehended in immigration raids without providing basic legal representation or judicial review, and the illegal drugging of both detainees and deportees, there have been growing calls for the reform of the immigration detention system.
"I've said from the beginning that we can't reform immigration laws until we control immigration, and we can't control immigration unless we control our borders and our ports." - Lou Dobbs
We've heard that statement in various forms a millions times, repeated ad infinitum by various politicians and talking heads since Frank Luntz first advised anti-immigrant Republicans to stress that ""A country that can’t control its own borders can’t control its own destiny" to sell an anti-immigrant agenda to the American public.
But it has always gone without saying that the border that needed to be controlled has been the one to the south. Rarely, if ever, has the northern border been mentioned in most border security screeds
On May 1st 2006, millions took to the streets in cities and communities throughout the nation to finally have their voices heard.
Out from the shadows came the forgotten, the marginalized, the nameless, faceless, mass of humanity who toil daily in thankless jobs with little reward or recognition.
Those who had labored invisibly for years as they quietly provided a nation with prosperity of which they could never partake, took to the streets to say "no more". We will no longer be marginalized ... We will no longer be demonized ... We will not be criminalize ....We Are America.
That day, as pundits and politicians tried to grasp the seismic shift taking place, attempting to read the tea leaves of public opinion and formulate positions that would serve them politically, two men had the courage to do not what was safe or politically expedient ...but rather, what was right.
After nearly nine months of planning and work, I'd like to announce the opening of a new on-line community for all those interested in humane and practical immigration reform, migrant-rights, human-rights, and the greater struggle of all who those have left friends and family behind to start new lives in new lands.
The Sanctuary is a grassroots effort of a group of pro-migrant, human-rights, and civil-rights bloggers and on-line activists, dedicated to the enactment of meaningful immigration reform that is practical, rational, fair and most of all humane, who have come together to start a new kind of issue-focused digital community that concentrates on analysis, news, and problem solving strategies for one of the most divisive issues facing the nation.
Started to help offset the growing influence of right-wing, anti-immigrant, voices that have thus far dominated the debate, it's mission is to create a broad community of on-line pro-migrant activists, and translate digital activism into real-world, practical action. Additionally, we hope to fill a void in the mainstream progressive blogosphere, by highlighting a growing, ethnically diverse, pro-migrant digital world that has not always found voice in progressive circles.
Each year approximately 2.8 million students graduate from US High Schools. Some will go on to college, join the military, or take other paths in life, hopefully all becoming productive members of society.
But for approximately 65,000 of them, these opportunities will never be available. Not because they lack motivation, or achievement, but because of the undocumented status passed on to them by their parents.
Lacking legal status and social security numbers, these students, raised and schooled in the US, cannot apply to college, get jobs other than those at the bottom of the economic ladder, or otherwise follow their dreams.
They grew up on American soil, worked hard and succeeded in spite of all odds, and want nothing more than to be recognized as individuals and not just the holders of a status they had no part in acquiring.
In Washington, politicians have debated the fate of these kids for more than seven years, holding lives and futures in their hands while vying for political advantage.
For these kids, and thousands more who have already managed through sheer force of will to complete their higher education, but now face a life of uncertainty and alienation, the DREAM Act is the only answer.
"Data base error ...no file found" ... You're fired!!!
That's the response millions of America workers could hear if the flawed Shuler-Tancredo immigration bill was to become law.
Requiring over 130 million US workers to prove they have the legal right to work, the SAVE ACT (HR4088) would force employers to submit to using a broken government database, so inaccurate that 12.7 million US-born and legal resident workers are categorized as undocumented workers. Once caught in this maze of bureaucratic incompetency, the SAVE Act would allow only ten days to prove ones eligibility to work or face mandatory termination.
In unsettled economic times, when many Americans are a single paycheck away from economic disaster, the last thing we need is another cynical election-year ploy to play to "the base" at the expense of working families. The American people want real solutions to real problems ... not cheap sound-bites masquerading as legislation.
Today will mark the fourth St Patrick's day to pass since I first started writing about immigration reform and migrant rights. And as any blogger who's been doing this for any amount of time can tell you, blog years are like dog years, and over three years in blogtopia can seem like a half a lifetime.
Two years ago, in 2006, this day had brought great promise.
The Kennedy-McCain Bill was making its way through the Senate and the first wave of the great immigration rallies were but only days away. Millions, including Irish and other immigrants from around the world, would take to the streets and demand meaningful reform.
We all thought change would surely come....yet it hasn't.
I'm not Irish, and don't partake in the revelry that marks the day. It usually passed for me rather uneventfully. But once I started blogging about immigration, in some strange way, it's become a milestone that marks the passage of time.
By all accounts, the failure of the "immigration issue" to deliver at the polls for the Republican Party should have sounded the death knell for any attempts at passing get-tough legislation in Washington before this year's election cycle was over.
With McCain as the presumptive nominee, one would think that down-ticket Republicans wouldn't want to re-hash the "immigration wars" and put their candidate in a position where he would have to once again revisit the issue.
But then again, that would assume that politics is based upon logic and McCain isn't more than willing to even further pander to anti-immigrant sentiment despite his previous record.
These have been heady times for those in the migrant-rights movement.
Starting back in November with the failure of anti-immigrant campaigns to resonate with the electorate, an apparent sea change was assumed to be taking place. Much ink and many pixels were expended speculating on the presumed death of the "immigration issue" as a motivating force in the US political scene.
From the left, the progressive blogosphere finally found the courage to voice pro-immigrant positions after nearly two years of bowing to the conventional wisdom coming out of Washington that immigration was a "third rail" not to be touched.
From the right, pundits and the chattering classes warned that to continue stoking the flames of anti-immigrant sentiments was like beating the proverbial dead horse, and would yield no rewards.
Over the following months things looked even brighter.
I've followed Markos' plan to upset the Republican apple cart by having Democrats swing the Michigan primary to Mitt Romney in hopes of perpetuating the infighting and negativity that have begun to mark the Republican race. And while theoretically it's actually quite a cleaver attempt at guerrilla politics, in actuality, Mitt's continued presence only keeps a real meltdown from occurring.
A recent exchange between Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council and Pat Toomey, president and CEO of the Club For Growth, on the Tweety show demonstrates just why.
The press, pundits and blogosphere have been abuzz with rumors of the death of the "immigration issue".
Citing the failure of anti-immigrant sentiment to translate into votes at the ballot box in the recent presidential primaries, the chattering classes have been quick to discount the issue's real effectiveness as an electoral wedge.
A stategy that "immigration is a non-issue" has been the de-facto official company-line from the DNC since early December when they released a new set of talking points on the issue after the failure of the wedge to deliver in the key off year races.
But now the Republicans seem to be picking up the mantra as well.
In an eloquent and stirring concession speech, Barack Obama ended his failed effort in New Hampshire with a rousing call for hope and change.
Assuring his supporters that the campaign would move forward to ultimate victory, Obama, whose message of "change" was picked up by all the major candidates from both parties except McCain, refined his message of inclusiveness to contain the rallying cry of "yes we can".
Reaffirming the belief that when faced with seemingly insurmountable obstacles, the American people can rise to the challenge if they have the will to do so, Obama listed off a litany of historical occasions when an apparently quixotic quest became reality through the sheer power of will. The junior Senator from Illinios led followers in an emotional call and response, punctuating each occurrence with the phrase "yes we can".
Today, two important events demonstrated just how far to the right the Republican Presidential candidates are shifting on the immigration issue. The first was the endorsement of Iowa frontrunner, Mike Huckabee, by Minutemen founder, Jim Gilchrist –not so much for the fact that Gilchrist is once again is trying to thrust his agenda center stage – but rather Huckabee's willingness to embrace it.
Team Tancredo.org, the official campaign website for the Tancredo campaign, has released a new web ad touting Tom's refusal to take part in last nights Spanish language, "illegal alien" debate sponsored by Univision.
Judging from the comments left on Trancredo's blog announcement about the ad:
Absolutely one of the best ads I've seen - in message and in humor! I was laughing so hard, it brought tears to my eyes! I especially enjoyed seeing McCain in the back of the truck with his "friends".!
we can only assume that this is what passes for humor in the Tancredo camp.
The Democratic Party finally released what appears to be their official strategy/talking points intended to counter the Republican immigration wedge.
Now, I'm not a high paid consultant, or a professional Washington strategist with a long history of losing campaigns, but for the life of me I can't seem to figure out what the Democratic leadership is trying to accomplish with this plan.
Up until now it appeared that the "Republican-lite" strategy developed by Rahm Emanuel and the DLC centrists looked like it would become the party line. But with this new strategy, recently released on the party's website, I frankly haven't a clue what the Dems ultimate plan is.
