The Politics and Policy of Immigration Reform: 2005-2009 Political Science 126C / Chicano/Latino Studies 163 Lecture 11 February 17, 2009

Today Pressures on Congress (and in the society) to reform immigration The 2005-2008 Congressional debates

Outcome of Current Debate Likely to be Major Reform Possibility 1 – Significant revision to 1965 Act while maintaining its principles Family unification, meeting national labor needs, refugee admissions with minimal bias by region or national origin Possibility 2 – Replacement of 1965 Act with new immigration framework Rare in U.S. immigration history Until then, stalemate Stalemate needs to be seen as a policy option Some (maybe the majority of interested parties) see stalemate as better than some of the possible changes

Why now? Possible reasons Demographic Economic Populist/political Ethnic Likely answer is some blend of each of these Important to consider as resolution in contentious pluralist debates (like immigration reform) will recognize organization of interests and volume of demand making

Demographic Size of immigrant population, either in raw numbers or as share of national population Size of the unauthorized population, again in absolute numbers or as a share of the (immigrant) population Dispersion of immigrant/unauthorized immigrant population Characteristics of immigrants and perceptions of their political or economic contribution to U.S. society

Economic Demand for labor not being met by native workers Changing needs of the U.S. economy Labor competition between immigrants and natives Costs of providing services to immigrants (including their U.S. citizen children) Global competition for skilled workers and “investors” In the past, economic downturns This may exacerbate tensions in the current debate, but it emerged during a robust economy

Populist/Political Opportunity to separate oneself from the pack, e.g. Tom Tancredo or John McCain Identifying immigration-related issues as part of a larger phenomenon, e.g. Lou Dobbs and the decline of the middle class More traditional nativism – the Minutemen Focus for community-level organizing in immigrant/ethnic communities or by other interested groups (labor unions)

Ethnic Elite – Tool to show newly emerging political influence and ethnic solidarity Mass – Resource to mobilize populations that have been more focused on transnational issues or have been distant from politics Some aspects of immigration “reform” hit home more than any other issue in U.S. politics Long-term – Will shape how immigrant/ethnic populations connect to the political parties for a generation

Why Does the “Why Now” Matter? Each of these factors is salient to some in Congress (and in the population more generally) To the extent that one comes to dominate, it could dramatically shape the eventual bill: Demographic – An overall cap on immigration; new enforcement of restrictions on unauthorized migration Economic – Limits on legal immigration by education/skill; guest worker programs Populist/political – New forms of nativism that focus on ethnic populations, not just immigrants Ethnic – New leadership in ethnic communities; diminished expectations for incorporation

Today Pressures on Congress (and in the society) to reform immigration The 2005-2008 Congressional debates

Roots of Key Elements of Contemporary Debate When does the story begin? 1976 – Fear of the unauthorized 1986 – IRCA 1990s New restrictions on legal immigration and easier deportation Steadily increasing border enforcement Congressional rejection of an overall cap on immigration 9/11 and concerns about immigrants and international security

Piecemeal Responses, Avoiding Major Compromise “Militarization” of the border (1990s) Early Bush outreach to Mexico/Latinos (Summer 2001) Set pattern – Bush proposed a guest worker program, but implied openness to legalization Quick rebuke from other Republican leaders 9/11/2001 – Puts debate on hold as Congress/President explore immigration and security USA Patriot Act Surging economy acts as lure for unauthorized migrants

Evolution of the Debate Returned to Congressional discussion in 2004/2005 Decline of post-9/11 security concerns Dramatic growth in unauthorized population (wide recognition of 12 million figure) and recognition of its dispersion Bush again proposes guest worker program with implied willingness to include legalization in some form Emergence of populist anti-immigrant movement (concentrated in states key to 2008 primary election) Democrats largely silent in this period, seeing Republican division opportunistically Not raised in 2004 presidential election

2005 – House of Representatives Acted Preemptively H.R. 4437 Fence/enforcement Unauthorized status a felony Employer penalties Authorizes use of the military to enforce immigration law No guest worker program or legalization Why? Preemptive of President and moderate Republicans in the Senate Republican leaders didn’t see felonization as good policy (didn’t expect it to have any effect), but spoke to popular concerns

Generates Pro-Immigrant Populist Marches Added another voice to the debate Forced Democratic members of Congress (the Senate) into the debate Ensured that 2008 Democratic candidates supported “comprehensive” reform (legalization as part of any bill)

U.S. Senate Response S. 2601 (2006) New funding for border and interior enforcement Three forms of legalization Path to permanent residence for unauthorized migrants who had resided in the U.S. for five years Three year temporary residence for unauthorized migrants who had resided in U.S. for 2 to 5 years, Path to permanent residence with return to country of origin Guest worker visa – up to 6 years, with ultimate path to permanent residence Overall cap on legal immigration (2007-2016)

End of 2006 Legislative Session Neither House nor Senate compromised, so neither bill passed Both agreed on an enforcement bill Immigration played a role in a handful of Congressional races Assumption that 2007-08 session would be more reception to “comprehensive” immigration reform because of Democratic control of both houses of Congress and President Bush’s need for a domestic legacy