Democrats play word games on immigration
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
June 30, 2009
 |
| U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. (AP File Photo) |
On June 24, Sen. Charles Schumer gave a remarkable speech on immigration. Preparing the way for the Obama administration's expected push for comprehensive reform, Schumer seemed to adopt a newer, tougher-sounding tone as he promised that a bill would be passed during "this Congress."
"People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the United States legally," Schumer said.
"Illegal immigration is wrong -- plain and simple," he continued. "When we use phrases like 'undocumented workers,' we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration, which the American people overwhelmingly oppose."
Schumer can read the polls as well as anybody. He knows he can't spout a bunch of pro-amnesty euphemisms and satisfy the voters' desire for strict controls on illegal immigration. That means he has to at least adopt the language of toughness. So out goes that word cherished among many Democrats: "undocumented." Schumer can read the polls as well as anybody. He knows he can't spout a bunch of pro-amnesty euphemisms and satisfy the voters' desire for strict controls on illegal immigration. That means he has to at least adopt the language of toughness. So out goes that word cherished among many Democrats: "undocumented."
Except not everyone got the message. The very next day, Schumer and other lawmakers met with President Barack Obama to discuss immigration. And guess what the president said? Not once, not twice, but three times:
» "We need a effective way to recognize and legalize the status of undocumented workers who are here."
» "[The American people are] concerned that any immigration reform simply will be a short-term legalization of undocumented workers with no long-term solution."
» "The 12 million or so undocumented workers are here [are a] group that we have to deal with in a practical, common-sense way."
And not only that, just a few days earlier, at a prayer breakfast with a Hispanic group, Obama said we cannot "tolerate employers who exploit undocumented workers in order to drive down wages."
That's a lot of "undocumented." Which suggests a question for Schumer. Do the president's words convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration?
It turns out even Schumer himself hasn't always taken his own advice. A couple of months ago, during a Capitol Hill hearing, he referred to "undocumented workers" while posing a question to former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan. He also used the phrase in his 2008 book, Positively American.
But now he's trying to massage the message. "Schumer's basically doing what McCain tried in the election," says Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. "[That is] to agree that 'enforcement first' is the right approach, but to argue that the enforcement has already happened and now it's time to proceed to amnesty." Schumer's proposal is filled with features that sound tough but likely won't be at all tough in practice. Krikorian warns that Schumer's promise to employ high-tech enforcement techniques in the future might come at the cost of amnesty today. After the amnesty is in place, the enforcement measures might never get done.
And it's not just that. Is this time of great economic distress really the right time to argue for greater immigration? "You want to bring more people in?" asks one incredulous GOP aide on Capitol Hill. "That was a hard case to make when unemployment was four percent, much less when it's almost ten percent."
And then there's time. Even if Democrats make room in the Senate schedule to address immigration — a big question, given the fights over cap-and-trade, health care, Sonia Sotomayor and other issues — there's real doubt about whether another big bill can be done amid the rush. That's why Schumer gave himself a little wiggle room by saying the bill would be passed "this Congress," meaning anytime between now and the end of next year. Finally, there's the opposition. A few years ago, Senate Republicans were evenly divided on the Kennedy-McCain immigration measure, a bill that had the strong support of a Republican president. Now, it's likely the opposition will be more unified.
"Republicans won't be as divided this time," the GOP aide says. "Then, you had a Republican president offering what some people said was a reasonable plan, and Republicans split right down the middle. Now, you're going to have a Democratic president with a Democratic Congress offering a left-leaning plan with unemployment in double digits. I don't think that's a recipe for success."
That means trouble for immigration reform -- no matter what words Schumer uses to describe it.
Byron York, The Examiner’s chief political correspondent, can be contacted at byork@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blog posts can be read daily at ExaminerPolitics.com.
More from Byron York
- GOP responds: White House 'trying to pass the buck'
- White House: People who criticize us are helping al Qaeda
- GOP winning war over Miranda rights for terrorists
- GOP fires back: White House did not tell us about reading Abdulmutallab his rights
- White House: Top GOP leaders didn't object to reading Abdulmutallab his rights
