Tag Archives: immigration reform

Mind the gap

IMG_0377

The unifying lustre of U.S. Independence Day celebrations was short lived this year. After a long weekend of flag flying, naturalization ceremonies, patriotic parades, home-grilled hamburgers and hot dogs, and fantastical firework shows, it was quickly back to the new normal of short-term thinking, special-interest legislating, and deadlock politics in the Nation’s Capital. And yet, after a fortnight of brutal political mudwrestling, there are now faint glimmers this week of a possible new modus operandi, at least in the U.S. Senate.

The most flagrant down grade was reserved for the meekest in U.S. society—those dependent on food stamps to feed themselves and their families. One in five Americans relies, in some way, on government food aid, such as food stamps or free or reduced school lunches; half of those who receive food aid are young people. These figures are stark reminders of how precarious life is for many in this wealthy but socially very unequal country.

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives passed a farm bill that provides substantial subsidies to agribusiness. To placate conservatives, the bill was stripped of its customary simultaneous provision of billions of dollars to the food stamp program, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Republicans say that food stamp funding will be taken up later, in subsequent legislation. But the fact remains that conservatives are fixated on addressing the spike in the size in the food stamp program. Reflecting the devastating impact of the 2008 recession, the percentage of the population using food stamps has apparently risen from 8.7 in 2007 to 15.2 in the most current data. Conservatives want to reduce this heightened dependence on government; they feel that private, perhaps church-based, organisations should rather be meeting such needs.

The food stamp exclusion came on the heels of Congressional Republicans choosing not to extend government-subsidized interest rates on student loans, thereby letting rates double. Their preference is instead for rates to reflect the market. While bipartisan efforts to produce a way forward are underway in the Senate, the uncertainty has been most debilitating for those loan-dependent students trying to plan for the imminent academic year.

The prospects for long-needed immigration reform also nosedived after Independence Day. House Speaker John Boehner said he wouldn’t place a Senate-passed bill on comprehensive immigration reform before the U.S. House of Representatives as it lacked support from a majority of Republican House members. Instead, House Republicans expect to address immigration reform in a piecemeal fashion. They plan to pass aspects of the Senate bill they endorse—such as strengthening border security, permitting more visas for high-skill immigrants, and possibly providing a solution for “Dreamers”, young people brought to the United States illegally as children who now identify exclusively as Americans. And they will likely ignore the part of the Senate bill that is anathema to them but nonnegotiable for Democrats—the “path to citizenship”, whereby 11 million illegal residents can qualify in a long, expensive, and time-consuming process to become full-fledged American citizens. Addressing immigration reform in this bite-sized way will, in all likelihood, kill the initiative for yet another cycle. And some say that is conservatives’ real goal: to deny President Obama legislative success in yet another arena that has defied reform despite successive attempts over the last decades.Happy birthday America!

The noted Congressional actions reveal a conservative strategy that is narrow, cynical, and ideological. In their purist zeal to limit the size of government, lower taxes for Americans, and reduce the budget deficit, House Republicans are hurting those in U.S. society who most depend on government. It is hard too to avoid noticing that the groups being treated so dismissively by these recent actions formed the core of the national majority that elected and then reelected Barack Obama as president: Latinos, African-Americans, young people, and (unmarried) women.

Given the reality of demographic trends, it is especially surprising that House Republicans are willing to follow a politically ruinous strategy by not addressing their “Hispanic vote problem” through all-encompassing immigration reform. Their argument that they need to ensure better turnout of their key constituency—the white working class—while also trying to attract those more inclined to vote Democratic is short sighted. This will resign the Republican Party to having voting strength in particular states, counties, and cities, but being unable to compete for national tickets. Losing the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections has apparently not yet hammered home the message. The recent narrowly focused actions of House Republicans will only further marginalize their party.

The disconnection between more moderate leaders of the Republican Party and zealous U.S. House of Representatives’ members should be noted. Mainstream Republicans, like many in the business community, endorse immigration reform, including the “path to citizenship”. Even former President George W. Bush came out forcefully in public recently in support of comprehensive immigration reform.

The most encouraging news of the week was the breakthrough deal in the U.S. Senate whereby seven of President Obama’s long-delayed nominations to senior positions in the executive branch will be confirmed, although two nominees will have to be fresh choices. This positive development resulted from a strategy of brinkmanship by both Senate Democrats and Republicans over the filibuster, a much-treasured tool for the minority party in the Senate. May this sorely needed compromise portend a new style in all things congressional—or at least senatorial.

In addition to starting to confirm more agreed-upon candidates for executive office, today a bipartisan group of senators also concurred on a way forward on government-subsidized student loans. Although today’s Senate proposal will have to be reconciled with the House version, agreement now appears likely on rates marginally higher than previously but lower than the market rate. This agreement will hopefully be reached before students will need to lock in loan rates for the new academic year.

Despite 237 years of independence and freedom, American democracy is still a work in progress.

A whimsical patriot

In an in-between season

DSC_0047America is in transition. As with the 9/11 attacks, the jarring, life-sapping bomb blasts at the Boston Marathon finish line on Monday are likely to change America. Unlike the predictable giving way of blooms on flowering trees and shrubs to green foliage in spring, what the past week’s events will herald in American society is not clear. The impact on President Barack Obama’s second-term agenda is also uncertain.

For the most part, the initial response has been a vigorous and aggressive re-assertion of America’s values and most fundamental beliefs. Speaking in Boston on Thursday, President Obama, who lived in Boston himself as a student, noted, “We may be momentarily knocked off our feet, but we’ll pick ourselves up.” While it was impossible for Bostonians to continue as normal much of the week, affirmations of normality could be observed here in the D.C. metro area—although security was tightened around public buildings, especially after the unsettling news of ricin-tainted letters being sent to the president and a senator. Friday was a bizarre day for all, even for those not in Boston or directly affected by the shutdown and “sheltering in place”. One could follow, in real time, the hunt for the remaining bomber. Some media halted regular programming to provide ongoing coverage, making for surreal, unsettling juxtapositions. One continued one’s scheduled activities while listening to and following media to learn the latest developments. Perhaps it was my imagination, but people seemed extra friendly, polite, and civil in their interactions with others on Friday. Life felt so fragile and delicate.

As the wife of a marathoner, my children and I have stood at the finish lines of many marathons. I know and appreciate the mood and emotions of people waiting at the end of these races: anticipation to see your special runner; joy (and utter relief) when you do see him/her; pride and marvel as you consider what all the runners have endured to reach that point; and enjoyment of the self-evident camaraderie among the runners who have all challenged themselves. The horrendous end to this year’s Boston Marathon has affected me in an intimate way. The death of the eight-year-old boy waiting for his dad to finish the race—with his sister, who subsequently lost a leg, and mother, who was also severely injured—is especially gutting. It could easily have been my family waiting at that marathon close.

The end of a marathon always involves such a complex flash of emotions. It is difficult to comprehend adding Boston’s horror, panic, and fear to the mix. One can only be impressed by the incredible bravery, compassion, and empathy that so many showed in Boston to their fellow runners and spectators when confronted with such gratuitous and unexpected mayhem.

One wonders whether some will now urge the adoption of further security measures for public gatherings such as marathons. Yet taking steps to scrutinize people before allowing access to public events could provoke a backlash and resistance to further intrusions on people’s freedoms. More security measures for such events might not be either cost effective or workable. It will be fascinating to watch how the public debate about this unfolds.

It is always said that America is a society of immigrants and laws. That the bombers were naturalized Americans of Chechen ethnicity and Moslem faith who arrived here on asylum visas is fodder for those campaigning against immigration reform. Quite coincidentally, comprehensive legislation on reforming U.S. immigration policies was presented to the American public this week (before the identities of the Boston bombers became known). A bipartisan group of eight senators has worked on this package for months, and their proposals for a way forward were eagerly awaited. Awareness of demographic trends in U.S. society and the present tendency of Hispanic communities to support the Democratic Party over the Republican Party make both parties more favourably disposed to tackling immigration reform.

Yet for both parties, immigration reform has profound implications. Not succeeding in getting immigration reform adopted would be disastrous for President Obama’s second administration. Indeed, passage of such reforms is a centerpiece of his second-term agenda. For the Republican Party, immigration reform is the quintessential wedge issue. There is no other issue that could splinter the party like immigration reform. The Boston bombers not being native-born Americans is a new complicating factor, with some already suggesting that all immigration should be stopped while immigration reform is debated.

The other political complication from the week was the rejection on Wednesday of a procedural step that would have allowed consideration of a bipartisan measure in the Senate to expand background checks on gun purchasers. It is noteworthy that expanding background checks has majority support in the Senate (54 to 46), the categorical backing of the White House, and the emphatic support of the majority of Americans according to public opinion polls. The procedural measure needed a “super majority” of 60 votes to pass, yet the National Rifle Association was able to prevent the measure from getting the six additional votes it needed for the background check measure even to be considered. Ironically, the majority vote would have been sufficient to pass the measure had the Senate actually been voting on the bill.

Will the minority that rejected even considering background checks for gun purchasers be the same minority that coalesces around rejecting immigration reform? Will those of this minority also stand in the way of progress on tax reform and reducing the budget imbalance, the other big issue of Obama’s second-term agenda? If so, what will be the verdict of American voters in the 2014 mid-term elections, the campaigns for which are effectively already underway?

Right after Boston, Obama declared that, “There are no Republicans or Democrats; we are Americans united in concern.” As the innocence of spring blossoms gives way to the grimy humidity of a Washington summer, one has to expect the ideological and political battles will heat up too.