The Politics of
Immigration
In a tug of war for voters in the upcoming elections,
one party is talking tough while the other remains silent.
By Ruben Navarrette, Jr.

So which of the two major political parties did a better job of tackling the immigration issue, and dealing with it in an honest, mature and responsible manner?
That’s easy. Neither one. Republicans went ballistic, while Democrats went missing.
During the summer, House Republicans—in taking a hard-line approach —held phony field hearings around the country to try to discredit the Senate’s version of immigration reform.
The Senate plan gives 12 million illegal immigrants a path to U.S. citizenship if they pay a fine, learn English, stay employed, undergo a criminal background check and go to the back of the line behind immigrants who came legally.
Around Labor Day, House Republicans attacked a middle-ground compromise proposed by a pair of conservative lawmakers—Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)—that rejects amnesty, puts border security first, and requires illegal immigrants to go home before reentering the country
legally as guest workers.
Even more disturbing is the reason that many of them oppose the Hutchison-Pence plan. Listen to House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, the author of a House bill that is heavy on enforcement. In an interview a few months ago, he told me that his problem with the Hutchison-Pence plan is that “it provides unlimited immigration from Mexico and Central America.”
This kind of statement only feeds the perception that the immigration debate is less about securing borders than about keeping out a specific group of people—people who happen to be Hispanic.
And, to cap things off, just a few weeks before this month’s midterm election, Republicans—desperate to avoid the perception that they hadn’t done anything at all on immigration reform—cobbled together a slate of meaningless enforcement measures such as building 700 miles of border fence, hiring more border patrol agents and stepping up prosecutions of immigrant smugglers.
None of that will do any good, of course, without first addressing the magnet that draws illegal immigrants here in the first place—jobs, jobs and more jobs provided by U.S. employers who thumb their noses at the law. Republicans must know that, but they don’t seem to care. All they worry about is convincing conservative voters that they really are dedicated to addressing this issue in the hopes of preserving the only jobs they care about: their own.
Meanwhile, Democrats just checked out of the debate altogether, despite the fact that many Hispanics had made it pretty clear that they wanted something done on immigration reform and despite the fact that some Democrats in Congress wouldn’t even be there had they not enjoyed Hispanic support. In fact, if there’s any political party that owes Hispanics, it’s Democrats and, on immigration reform, they didn’t deliver.
Instead, in December 2005, 191 House Democrats—on orders from party leaders—voted against an amendment to the Sensenbrenner bill that would have downgraded the crime of being in the country illegally from a felony to a misdemeanor.
Then came the 35-second Internet ad from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee showing footage of illegal immigrants scaling a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border juxtaposed with images of Osama bin Laden and packaged them both as threats to national security. The idea was to accuse the White House of failing to protect Americans. But, after Latinos criticized Democrats for mixing terrorists and immigrants, the ad was pulled.
More recently, Democrats thought they could cruise into the November election by leaving immigration off the agenda altogether. In September, House Democratic leaders passed around to colleagues a plan that spelled out what issues they would focus on if their party wins control of the House of Representatives. The 25-page plan, dubbed “A New Direction for America,” made no mention of immigration reform, beyond stressing border security. There was not a word about comprehensive immigration reform that might give some or all of the 12 million illegal immigrants in this country a path to U.S. citizenship.
Democrats said they wanted to focus on issues on which they have a “consensus.”
And now for the truth: Democratic leaders are afraid the immigration issue could hurt them in conservative districts that they need to win in order to take control of the House in November.
Hispanic lawmakers are furious. Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY) Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) and others challenged party leaders over the omission and insisted that Hispanic voters deserve to know where Democrats stand on immigration reform.
Yes and no. Hispanics only deserve what they’re willing to demand—from both parties. This is shoddy treatment indeed, and it shouldn’t go unpunished. But unless Hispanics kick up a fuss, and hold Republicans and Democrats alike accountable for their handling of the immigration issue, they better get used to it—because they’re likely to get more of the same.

Ruben Navarrette, Jr. is a member of the editorial board of the San Diego Union-Tribune, a nationally syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group and a frequent commentator on National Public Radio.