Carpe Diem, Obama!
Published in El Universal
(Mexico) on 19 November 2014
by Arturo Sarukhan (link to original)
It is possible that by the time this column is published, we will have more clarity with regard to the administrative actions taken by President Barack Obama to mitigate the economic, social and human costs that a dysfunctional and broken immigration system imposes on the United States. These actions could affect between 2.3 million and 5 million people (the majority of whom are Mexican) out of nearly 12 million undocumented immigrants by granting them legal status and/or work permits, thereby reducing the number of deportations.
I have emphasized in previous columns on this same page that since 2006, Democrats and Republicans, as well as Congress and the White House, have been guilty, by commission or omission, of failing to enact comprehensive immigration reform in 2006, 2007 and 2014, reform which would bring millions of undocumented immigrants out from the shadows and provide them with the means to be part of a legal, organized labor force. It is also a fact that neither party can throw the first stone. Nevertheless, it is an inescapable reality that the Republicans are responsible for having repeatedly torpedoed debate throughout 2014. In modern American politics, all important decisions on the subject of domestic as well as foreign policy have come from bipartisan agreement in Congress. But today, the American political system is in an unprecedented and deep ideological gridlock. As a consequence, a unilateral decision by President Obama at this time has potentially delicate political consequences for the relationship between the executive branch and Congress, which will be entirely controlled by the Republicans after January.
The rejection that will come from a conservative base, a base which currently represents the strength of the Republican Party, due to the fact that Obama’s executive action may force the Republicans into a corner as it faces an influential coalition of young, liberal, independent and Hispanic voters in the upcoming 2016 presidential election, may rupture the relationship between the White House and Congress for the remaining period of this administration.
Faced with a unilateral decision by the president, Republicans will respond by criticizing the supposedly unconstitutional use of presidential power (certainly ignoring the fact that Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resorted to using these same powers in their time, specifically on the subject of immigration), and by taking punitive legislative measures, including the option favored by the “Taliban” sections of the party (although rejected by its national leadership) of freezing authorization for the federal government’s 2015 operating budget.
Faced with an obstructionist opposition, the president committed two important tactical errors in the recent past. First, he postponed this administrative action until after the Congressional midterm election in an attempt to electorally shield the six Democratic senators whose seats were vulnerable. The decision to wait not only failed to save those seats, but in Colorado, it may have cost the president and the Democrats control of the Senate, given the fact that the Hispanic vote, motivated and mobilized by a presidential decision, could have made a difference in the outcome. Secondly, Obama cannot afford the luxury of once again announcing an ultimatum or setting deadlines and not fulfilling them. He originally stated that he would not make decisions before the midterm election, and recently that he would act before the end of the year. With respect to Syria as well as immigration, this pattern has been costly for the president’s image, and for the public’s perception of his leadership. In light of this, I do not believe he has any other choice; at this stage, the question he should be asking himself is, “What else do I have to lose?”
It is clear that immigration reform is not going to be resolved merely by a presidential administrative action. Comprehensive, effective and structural reform over the long term, which lays a foundation for economic prosperity, social well-being and security of the U.S. — and, incidentally, Mexico — will need to come from Congress and will require bipartisan support in the Capitol. However, in the prevailing political context, that possibility today is nil. Mario Cuomo, the former governor of New York, pointed out that politicians campaign in poetry but govern in prose. For purposes of the president’s agenda, the American political context cannot become any more radical than it is already, and it is naive to think that the Republicans will agree to pass comprehensive immigration reform in the short term. It is time that President Obama, one of the best poets who has ever campaigned, accepts that the arid prose of decision-making and risk is the only path from here to 2016.
I have emphasized in previous columns on this same page that since 2006, Democrats and Republicans, as well as Congress and the White House, have been guilty, by commission or omission, of failing to enact comprehensive immigration reform in 2006, 2007 and 2014, reform which would bring millions of undocumented immigrants out from the shadows and provide them with the means to be part of a legal, organized labor force. It is also a fact that neither party can throw the first stone. Nevertheless, it is an inescapable reality that the Republicans are responsible for having repeatedly torpedoed debate throughout 2014. In modern American politics, all important decisions on the subject of domestic as well as foreign policy have come from bipartisan agreement in Congress. But today, the American political system is in an unprecedented and deep ideological gridlock. As a consequence, a unilateral decision by President Obama at this time has potentially delicate political consequences for the relationship between the executive branch and Congress, which will be entirely controlled by the Republicans after January.
The rejection that will come from a conservative base, a base which currently represents the strength of the Republican Party, due to the fact that Obama’s executive action may force the Republicans into a corner as it faces an influential coalition of young, liberal, independent and Hispanic voters in the upcoming 2016 presidential election, may rupture the relationship between the White House and Congress for the remaining period of this administration.
Faced with a unilateral decision by the president, Republicans will respond by criticizing the supposedly unconstitutional use of presidential power (certainly ignoring the fact that Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resorted to using these same powers in their time, specifically on the subject of immigration), and by taking punitive legislative measures, including the option favored by the “Taliban” sections of the party (although rejected by its national leadership) of freezing authorization for the federal government’s 2015 operating budget.
Faced with an obstructionist opposition, the president committed two important tactical errors in the recent past. First, he postponed this administrative action until after the Congressional midterm election in an attempt to electorally shield the six Democratic senators whose seats were vulnerable. The decision to wait not only failed to save those seats, but in Colorado, it may have cost the president and the Democrats control of the Senate, given the fact that the Hispanic vote, motivated and mobilized by a presidential decision, could have made a difference in the outcome. Secondly, Obama cannot afford the luxury of once again announcing an ultimatum or setting deadlines and not fulfilling them. He originally stated that he would not make decisions before the midterm election, and recently that he would act before the end of the year. With respect to Syria as well as immigration, this pattern has been costly for the president’s image, and for the public’s perception of his leadership. In light of this, I do not believe he has any other choice; at this stage, the question he should be asking himself is, “What else do I have to lose?”
It is clear that immigration reform is not going to be resolved merely by a presidential administrative action. Comprehensive, effective and structural reform over the long term, which lays a foundation for economic prosperity, social well-being and security of the U.S. — and, incidentally, Mexico — will need to come from Congress and will require bipartisan support in the Capitol. However, in the prevailing political context, that possibility today is nil. Mario Cuomo, the former governor of New York, pointed out that politicians campaign in poetry but govern in prose. For purposes of the president’s agenda, the American political context cannot become any more radical than it is already, and it is naive to think that the Republicans will agree to pass comprehensive immigration reform in the short term. It is time that President Obama, one of the best poets who has ever campaigned, accepts that the arid prose of decision-making and risk is the only path from here to 2016.