 |
Townhall...
Obama’s Hypocritical
Rhetoric on Immigration Reform
By Michael Barone
Barack Obama’s immigration speech in El Paso May 10 was an exercise in
electioneering and hypocrisy. Hypocrisy because while Obama complained
about “politicians” blocking comprehensive immigration bills, he was
one of them himself.
In 2007, when such a bill was backed by a lame duck Republican
president and had bipartisan backing from Senate heavyweights Edward
Kennedy and Jon Kyl, Sen. Obama voted for union-backed amendments that
Kennedy and Kyl opposed as bill-killers.
In 2009 and 2010, President Obama acquiesced in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s
decision to pass cap-and-trade and bypass immigration and in Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid’s decision not to bring an immigration bill
to the floor.
Both times the votes were probably there to pass a bill. Obama did not
lift a finger to help.
But that did not stop the president who is constantly calling for
civility to heap scorn on those who seek stronger enforcement. “They’ll
want a higher fence. Maybe they’ll need a moat,” he said to laughter
from the largely Latino audience. “Maybe they’ll want alligators in the
moat. They’ll never be satisfied.”
Was that on the teleprompter, or was it ad-libbed? In either case,
Obama was showing his contempt for those who bitterly cling to the idea
that the law should be enforced.
That’s no way to assemble the bipartisan coalition necessary to pass an
immigration bill.
It’s obvious that nothing like the legalization (opponents say
“amnesty”) provisions considered in 2007 can pass in this Congress.
They can never pass the Republican House, where Judiciary Chairman
Lamar Smith is a longstanding opponent and Speaker John Boehner will
not schedule a bill not approved in committee.
Nor will this Congress pass the most attractive proposal Obama
mentioned, the Dream Act, providing a path to legalization for those
brought in illegally as children who enroll in college or serve in the
military. That failed last December in a more Democratic Senate and
won’t pass now.
Some new approach is needed, and Obama did little to point the way. One
idea, advanced by a bipartisan Brookings Institution panel, is a bill
that would strengthen enforcement and would shift the U.S. away from
low-skill and toward high-skill immigration.
Canada and Australia have done this to their great benefit. And with a
sluggish economy it makes little sense, as current law does, to give
preference to low-skill siblings of minimum wage workers rather than to
engineering and science Ph.D.s. We need more job creators, not more job
seekers.
The problem here is that the lobbying forces backing comprehensive
legislation don’t favor such an approach. Latino groups and lobbies
representing employers of low-skill workers are interested in
legalizing the low-skill Latinos who make up the majority of the 11
million illegal immigrants.
High-tech firms seek more H-1B visas for high-skill graduates, but
these tie immigrants to particular employers. They don’t have an
interest in provisions allowing these people to work for anyone they
don’t like or to start their own businesses, as they can in Canada and
Australia.
In the absence of significant lobbying support, the only way to provide
support for Brookings-style legislation is a bold presidential
initiative advertising it as a clean break from past proposals.
Obama didn’t come close to doing that in El Paso. He included a few
words about letting in more high-skill folks, but didn’t suggest any
reduction in low-skill immigration.
And he said only a few words about workplace enforcement on which his
administration has developed a valuable new tool.
That’s a refinement of the E-Verify electronic system now available in
which employers can verify the Social Security numbers of new employees.
The Department of Homeland Security has been ironing out glitches in
E-Verify and, as former National Security Agency general counsel
Stewart Baker reports, DHS now allows job-seekers in some states to use
E-Verify before applying for a job not only to check their status but
also to protect against identity theft.
The administration has been attacking state laws requiring employers to
use E-Verify. If Obama were serious about enforcement, he would be
calling for mandatory E-Verify. That would be a more effective tool
against illegal immigration than even the strongest border enforcement.
But as Obama’s record makes clear, he’s not really interested in
passing a law. He knows his support has been slipping among Latino
voters, and he wants to goose it back up. El Paso was all about
election 2012, not serious immigration reform.
Read it at Townhall
|
