[This commentary was originally published in
New America Media.]
A recent story by Maribel Hastings of La
Opinión newspaper provides the most comprehensive analysis
yet of the similarities and differences between John McCain
and Barack Obama around immigration policy. According to Hastings,
“Both candidates support construction of a wall at the southern
U.S. border. But the most
important differences are less obvious and have more to do with
what kind of reform the candidates advocate for and try to get
approved, according to Cecilia Muñoz, vice president of the
National Council of La Raza (NCLR).”
Among those revealing details, says Hastings, are small but important differences that may make a major
difference in what will surely be an intense fight for the Latino
vote. Hastings continues,
“McCain, for example, is opposed to the DREAM Act, which would
benefit undocumented students and Obama supports it;” adding
that “McCain opposes the idea of giving driver’s licenses to
the undocumented, while Obama favors the proposal.”
Reading Hastings’ article, one can’t help but
think of how many other opportunities for differentiation the
seemingly endless maze of migration law and policy offers the
candidates – and the immigrant rights movement - this election
year.
If only the political will to bring greater attention
to these often life-saving details existed.
The most strategic and important opportunity
to turn the page on the immigration debate via the elections
does not orbit around the twin axes of legalization and border
security favored by the liberal-conservative consensus of some
Democrats, some Republicans and their allies. This is the approach
of the McCain-Kennedy bill still favored by both candidates.
Much
has changed for immigrants since that bill failed in 2006-2007.
What is, without a doubt, the most significant change since
backers of the various versions of the McCain-Kennedy bill failed
to reform immigration policy in 2006-2007 is how rancid and
radically bad - detention deaths, thousands of raids, massive
deportations, traumatized children, steadily growing streams
of hate media and hate crimes, etc. - the anti-immigrant climate
has become thanks to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) agency and others. In such a climate, “immigration reform”
focusing primarily on legalization and “border security” seems
out-of-touch, if not dangerous.
A more strategic, urgent and powerful immigration
reform strategy has to center around the colossal tragedy caused
by ICE, the colossal tragedy that is ICE. The greatest
good Obama, McCain or anyone else can do to aid current and
future immigrants is to put radically re-organizing, if not
dismantling, ICE at the center of any discussion about “immigration
reform” in the United States. Asking
McCain and Obama to lead calls for either Congressional investigations
or the establishment of a special investigative committee of
some sort (as happened with detention facilities in Abu Ghraib
and Guantanamo) seems
like a good place to start. So would calls for the immediate
resignation of ICE chief Julie Myers, who has overseen an agency
that has sexually abused, physically beaten, drugged, used dogs
against and even killed immigrant detainees in a manner not
unlike that seen in offshore military detention centers. With
increasing frequency since 2006, Hastings and other Spanish
language reporters in print and electronic media outlets have
filled pages and airwaves with tear-inspiring, almost daily
reports of numerous forms of abuse, death and fear experienced
by immigrants at the hands of ICE.
In
their efforts to differentiate themselves among voters, especially
Latino voters, Senators McCain and Obama might also want these
voters to see and hear them lead the fight to pass the Secure
and Safe Detention and Asylum Act (SSDS), which was reintroduced
last Wednesday by Senators Lieberman, Brownback, Kennedy, and
Hagel. The SSDS addresses some of the more serious problems
faced by immigrants in detention, problems recently brought
to light by major news reports. The detention-focused legislation
includes provisions for improved conditions and medical care,
reporting of deaths, judicial review of detention for asylum
seekers and other detainees, expansion of alternatives to detention
and, most importantly, more oversight.
So, in the netherworld of the immigrant gulag
growing on our shores, the small differences around the minutiae
of immigration law can mean the difference between life and
death, a difference that can win the hearts and minds of many
voters this year.
BlackCommentator.com
Guest Commentator, Roberto Lovato, is a contributing Associate Editor with New America Media. He
is also a frequent contributor to The Nation and his work has appeared in the Los Angeles Times, Salon, Der Spiegel, Utne Magazine, La Opinion, and
other national and international media outlets. Prior to becoming
a writer, Roberto was the Executive Director of the Central American Resource
Center (CARECEN),
then the country’s largest immigrant rights organization. Click
here
to contact him or via his Of América
blog.
(Note: What follows is the La Opinion piece translated
into English thanks to Matt Ortega)
Immigration
Reform Defines Positions
Obama and McCain Plans
Overlap Somewhat, but Have Significant Differences
By Maribel Hastings
La Opinion Correspondent
At first glance there doesn’t seem to be significant
differences between Senator Obama and Senator McCain’s stance
on immigration. It’s because Obama supports reform previously
supported by John McCain until the political climate led him
to take a “security-first” approach.
If anything is similar between McCain and Obama
and their respective political parties, Republican and Democrat,
it’s to avoid the issue all together when possible. Especially
since it’s not on the top of the issues of most concern to voters,
and a volatile topic.
What’s odd is that it’s an issue that, according
to some, would benefit McCain in the fight for latino votes
as the Senator from Arizona
co-authored the Immigration Reform Bill with Senator Edward
Kennedy (D-MA).
Although McCain presently emphasizes a “security-first”
approach, the McCain/Kennedy bill still resounds among many
hispanics.
But everything is relative. Yesterday a NBC/WSJ
poll concluded that 62% of hispanic voters prefer Obama versus
28% for McCain.
Upon closer scrutiny of both candidate positions,
there are differences. For example, McCain opposes the Dream
Act that benefits undocumented students and Obama supports it;
McCain opposes giving driving licenses to illegal immigrants;
Obama supports it.
Nevertheless, both would vote in favor of building
a wall on the southern border.
“But the most important differences are less
obvious and have to do with what type of reform they’ll propose
and try to pass,” said Cecilia Munoz, vice president of the
National Council of La Raza (NCLR).
According to Munoz, McCain’s talk on immigration
changes “depending on his audience.”
“We had George Bush’s heart behind immigration
reform and that wasn’t enough. I think John McCain’s heart is
behind the legislation but we don’t know if he wants or would
be able to really push through the type of reform he wants,”
she added.
“Not only is he trying to placate latino voters,
but the anti-immigrant side of his party as well, and this will
constrain him in an important way” said Munoz.
McCain spokesman Jeff Sadosky told La Opinion
that McCain thinks its very important to express his positions
with “clear and compassionate” language.
“John McCain thinks that we need to secure the
border first, but at the same time he understands that we need
to handle the immigration debate humanely while understanding
that everybody needs to be treated with respect,” declared Sadosky.
For McCain it’s to attract hispanics without
alienating the conservative Republican base.
But Obama also faces obstacles.
Certainly, the Senator’s positions are also more
progressive than the official position of the democrats that
control congress, like the Senator’s support for giving drivers
licenses to illegal immigrants.
But not even the democrats that control both
Houses of Congress have been able to advance comprehensive reform.
The Senator tried, but the House of Representatives
seems more interested in holding hearings than producing concrete
results.
There’s a division between conservative democrats
in the House that favor measures focused on security like Rep.
Health Shuler’s (R-NC) plan and those that support comprehensive
reform like the Hispanic Caucus.
Furthermore, it’s not only the white working
class that’s hostile to comprehensive reform. There’s also a
perception that there are sectors within the Afro-American community
that are hostile to such reform as well.
Munoz pointed to surveys that prove otherwise
and that national Afro-American organizations, like the NAACP,
actively support comprehensive reform.
But, according to Munoz, the fact that Obama
promises to advance immigration reform in the beginning of his
possible administration not only is a message to the immigrant
community but also to Congress.
“It’s the type of difference with [John McCain]
that is less obvious but equally important: the quality of the
compromise,” she concluded.