I honestly don’t know how the Senate can fit immigration reform into their schedule for this year, but they appear willing to try. After the Senate finishes up health care reform, they’ll move to work on the $155 billion jobs bill that the House passed before they recessed for the holidays. In February, the White House will unveil their budget for the year, and it is expected to somehow begin to address the soaring budget deficit. It won’t be an easy ride for congressional appropriators or the budget committees. Then there is work to be done on the financial/banking reforms. The House passed their version in December, and the Senate Banking Committee is still in the negotiating phase. And the toughest issue of all is the climate legislation. Adding immigration reform to this schedule seems optimistic. I can’t see it happening before the August recess, and then we’ll be right into the congressional midterm elections.
In a general sense, immigration is a bad issue for the Republicans because they and their base really can’t help themselves and they alienate racial minorities and people who recoil from overt and veiled messages of race-based hate. The issue also demoralizes their base because the Republicans serve cheap labor before all else. But what is true in a general sense does not necessarily carry on a district by district basis. Any kind of ‘amnesty’ program, as opponents like to call it, is going to be a very difficult vote for a lot of Democrats in conservative (i.e., overwhelmingly white) districts, particularly in the South. Having such a debate in Congress in the immediate months before an election is bound to cause a lot of incumbents to lose. That’s the main reason I wouldn’t expect them to debate immigration in the latter half of this year. But, that looks like what the White House is promising to do.
Apparently, they had to agree to this to get the Hispanic caucus on board for health care reform and remove the immigration obstacles in the bill since immigration reform would mitigate these issues.
I think overall, it’s a smart play. I think it would activate younger voters, latinos, and AA’s if the Republicans became too overtly racial.
Given the high rate of unemployment, http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/11/24/youth-employ/, I doubt if immigration reform is all that exciting to African-Americans.
If it caused a lot of Blue Dogs to lose, while still keeping the majority, I’d probably be for it. Just so long as those that remain aren’t catered to like the obstructionist asshats in the Senate.
It could cause some Blue Dogs to lose. How many, I’m not sure.
Take a look at this list:
http://www.house.gov/bilbray/irc/members.shtml
It’s the roster for the immigration reform caucus in the House. These are the no-amnesty people. The caucus has 93 members, down from a high of 110 about a year and a half ago. Only six of these folks are Dems.
I do wonder if BooMan’s point about energizing bases plays into this. The HIRC had about 20 members on the ropes last November. Ten went down and the other 10 just squeaked by. Some of the survivors were among the bigger names on this list — Bachmann and Bilbray, for example.
It would seem to me that bringing up immigration reform during the Republican Primaries would be a fantastic time to do it. The far-right would latch onto the hard-liners, driving even the moderates further than they’d normally go. When the dust settles from what would likely be pretty bloody battles, you’d be left with some seriously tainted candidates on the Republican side for the General. It might be the last best hope for Dems, if it can fire up minorities to show up at the polls.
And while one of my personal issues is the environment, I think that there is still an outside possibility that the Senate could gain a seat or two in the mid-terms. This could be helped by the scenario listed above. It’s a gamble, but the idea of sliding back Climate Change legislation to next year, if it means that we might get a better bill (the current one falls WELL short of what we need), it might be worth taking.
Aside from creating jobs, of course, is confirming judges. Obama needs to start nominating a lot more judges, and the Senate needs to get them confirmed.
I have this sick feeling in my stomach that if the GOP picks up a net of at least 1-2 Senate seats, the GOP might try to stop any judicial appointments for the next two years in the hopes that a Republican will beat Obama.
The GOP did just this in Clinton’s second term. Hopefully Obama and Reid get on the ball and start confirming a few dozen judges this year.
I think it’s a safe bet that John Paul Stevens will retire this year.
Kathleen Sullivan would be an interesting pick as replacement. Imagine the outrage.
Can’t Obama just make a bunch of recess appointments if he doesn’t intend to fight for any of them?
The political calculus is more complex that conventional wisdom would have it. The Hispanic vote is going to be an important segment in states that have Senate campaigns, even in those in some unlikely places, like North Carolina, South Carolina, and Iowa. Bur for example, defeated Erskine Bowles by introducing the “illegal alien” issue at the last minute in the 2004 campaign. Since then, the Hispanic population has grown in North Carolina, beginning in agriculture and food processing, moving to construction, and now in a variety of entrepreneurial ventures. Any Senatorial challenger to Burr (Elaine Marshall, Cal Cunningham, Keith Lewis) will benefit by trying to turn out Hispanics. They will lose fewer white voters in exchange.
But it’s going to put some Blue Dog members of the House in a bit of a bind–damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Which voters do you want to sacrifice. Given the demographics (including the Hispanic voters at Camp Lejeune), seeing Republican Walter Jones advocating immigration reform would not surprise me. Whether the GOP will give him that flexibility is interesting to contemplate; after all, Walter could come home to Daddy’s party; he’s not a ideological Republican anyway; it was just a way to hold onto Daddy’s seat in Congress.
It is likely being put on the calendar to ensure that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus does not have a protest vote against the healthcare reform bill in the House.
And timing is everything. I can see this bill still being in process at the time of the 2010 elections and being an issue of the campaign. And out of the campaign, a mandate to go forward with immigration reform. That at least is my reading.
I say BRING ON IMMIGRATION. it will make Healthcare look like child’s play.
A push on immigration will result in the loss of the House. In 1995, immigration was doable, since employment was in good shape. Today? With 10 % unemployment? No way.
By the time the Senate got through with it, immigration reform would be a ceiling on nanny wages and a nuclear radiation zone along the Mexican border.