The Obama Immigration Reform strategy and why it failed

Electing a Democrat to the White House in 2008 was all about change.

For Hispanics, change was the means to obtain Immigration Reform to bring an end to the deportation of undocumented Hispanics. In 2008, Bush set a record of deporting 368,401 undocumented. This may be a hard number to put your arms around but put another way: 1,009 persons a day were deported by Bush.

Hispanics voted for change in 2008 never thinking Obama would ratchet up Bush's numbers — but we were wrong.

With "change" in 2010, President Obama deported 387,790 undocumented Hispanic immigrants — a 5 percent jump over the Bush administration’s record in 2008.

Obama and Napolitano have become even worse tyrants than the infamous Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona.

All to enhance "Law Enforcement" to cater to the Republican mantra of "Security First," euphuism for blatant racism directed toward Hispanics.

To achieve "Security First," Obama uses Secretary of Homeland Secretary's tenacious Janet Napolitano whose priority is all about Janet Napolitano.

Obama appointed Napolitano primarily because of Napolitano's "take no prisoners" mantra to achieve a higher position in the pecking order. With no scruples, it is alleged Napolitano as the U.S. Attorney for Arizona dropped the investigation of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in return for Arpaio's endorsement for Napolitano to become Arizona Attorney General.

Now as Secretary of Homeland Security, Napolitano has become the key player driving Immigration Reform via "Securing the Border," euphemism for being tough using law enforcement.

Napolitano under Obama's mandate has expanded the number of partnerships with local police that allow them to enforce federal immigration laws. While abandoning the attention getting raids on businesses employing undocumented of the Bush era, it has stepped up electronic investigations of employee records, which has led to lower-profile but equally disruptive enforcement efforts.

The Obama/Napolitano's tough-love approach to immigration aims both to foster Republican support for Immigration Reform and to avoid claims Obama is soft on crime and security issues, but for some advocates of reform, Obama/Napolitano's right turn has gone so far it is becoming a liability in the long fight to pass comprehensive Immigration Reform.

“The political strategy Obama/Napolitano are pursuing is a bankrupt one,” said Deepak Bhargava, executive director of the Center for Community Change, "Tough enforcement was supposed to give the president the 'bona fides' to push through reform. Instead, it has only wet the appetite of conservatives for more and more enforcement.” 

Frank Sharry, head of America’s Voices, said, "Reform opponents will never be satisfied. Republicans have been moving the goal post on this border-security-first issue for a decade. It’s never enough and it never will be enough. It’s a fool’s errand.”

Worse still, immigrant advocates charge, in their zeal to demonstrate toughness, Janet Napolitano's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its enforcement partners have dragged many law-abiding undocumented immigrants and legitimate businesses into the system, shattering Obama’s promises of more humane treatment.

Seeking to reverse a steep drop in deportations, Napolitano has set controversial new quotas for agents. At the same time, officials have stepped back from an Obama/Napolitano commitment to focus enforcement efforts primarily on undocumented immigrants who are dangerous or have violent criminal backgrounds. Now, an one with a brown face is suspect!

The moves, outlined in internal documents and a recent e-mail by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE chief John T. Morton, a senior U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official, to field directors nationwide, differ from pledges by Obama to focus enforcement on the most dangerous undocumented immigrants.

The shift is troubling to labor strategists and immigrant advocates, who for years have seen accepting tougher enforcement as a concession that would allow them to attain their goal of bringing undocumented workers and their families out of the shadows.

"Why would a conservative Republican vote for something if they are already getting what they want?" said Ali Noorani, a lead organizer of national demonstrations to hold President Obama to his 2008 campaign promise to take action.

Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-Ill.) and other immigrant-rights advocates also questioned how President Obama and Janet Napolitano could preside over the greatest number of deportations in any two-year period in the nation's history. Obama's answer, always the same, "Deporting almost 800,000 undocumented immigrants might antagonize some Democrats and Hispanic voters but stepped-up enforcement is the only way to buy credibility with Republicans and generate bipartisan support for an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws."

On December 18, 2010, the Obama/Napolitano Immigration strategy was in ruins after Senate Democrats could only muster 55 votes in support of the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, a measure that would have created a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country as children. Under Senate rules, Democrats needed 60 votes to overcome Republican opposition to the bill.

The House of Representatives after a heated debate, on December 8, 2010, passed the Dream act 216 to 198.

The irony of the DREAM Act's failure is it had strong bipartisan support before the start of the Obama administration and advocates believed it could generate momentum for more controversial policy changes.

With the defeat of the DREAM Act, Immigration Reform is now dead in the water.

Everyone believes immigration overhaul is not possible in the next two years, given the views of many members of the incoming Republican majority in the House.

Never-the-less, Obama/Napolitano continue to ramp up deportations. Again immigrant-rights supporters are second-guessing the president's efforts to woo Republicans but there is no empathy from Obama.

"It is a strategy which has borne no fruit whatsoever," Gutierrez said, "This administration has unilaterally led the march on enforcement, yet the other side has not given one morsel of compromise."

At a recent press briefing, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano denied the administration had increased deportations in order to bring Republicans to the bargaining table.

"I don't view it as a quid pro quo," Napolitano said. "We enforce the law because we took an oath to enforce the law." But a senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to speak candidly, said although there was no explicit quid pro quo, the administration had indeed hoped tougher enforcement could create a new climate where legislative compromise could become easier.

The vote by the Senate on December 18, 2010, to block a bill to grant legal status to hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrant students was a painful setback to an emerging movement of immigrants and appeared to leave the immigration policy of the Obama/Napolitano administration in total disarray.

The result, although not unexpected, was still a rebuff to President Obama by newly empowered Republicans in Congress on an issue Obama has called one of his priorities. Supporters believed the bill — tailored to benefit only immigrants who were brought here undocumented when they were children and hoped to attend college or enlist in the military — was the easiest piece to pass out of a larger overhaul of immigration laws.

Obama/Napolitano have pursued tough enforcement — producing a record number of about 390,000 deportations last year — with an effort to pass the overhaul, which would open a path to legal status for an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants. Now, with less hope for any legalization measures since Republicans have now take over the House, the administration is left with just the stick.

The administration’s efforts to manage its policy dilemma played before the vote. John Morton, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said Napolitano had decided to continue the brisk pace of deportations.

What the Dream Act meant for America's Hispanics & why Obama could not prevent its defeat

Hispanic groups pushed hard for passage of the DREAM Act, mobilizing thousands of students to campaign for the measure across the nation and the Washington area. The students went on hunger strikes, conducted prayer vigils, and organized holiday food drives and Thanksgiving dinners with citizens.

The DREAM Act would have given hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants brought to the United States before age 16 a chance to gain legal status if they have been here for five years, have graduated from high school, have no criminal record, and attend college or serve in the military for two years.

But the Obama administration miscalculated Republican racism toward Hispanics, said a senior Democratic Hill staffer, speaking on the condition of anonymity since he was not authorized to talk about the issue. Even as the administration stepped up deportations, conservatives charged Obama with being too soft on the country's estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants.

Birthright Citizenship will be the next Immigration Reform fight

The next big immigration battle looming on the horizon centers on undocumented immigrants’ offspring, who are granted automatic citizenship if born on American soil. Arguing for an end to the policy, long rooted in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, immigration hard-liners describe a wave of migrants stepping across the border in the advanced stages of pregnancy to drop what are dismissively called “anchor babies.”

Still, Arizona — whose tough law granting the police the power to detain undocumented immigrants is tied up in the courts — may again take the lead in what is essentially an attempt to redefine what it means to be an American. This time, Arizona lawmakers intend to join with legislators from several other states to force the issue before the Supreme Court.

This coalition of lawmakers involved in drafting the legislation say they have decided against the painstaking process of amending the Constitution and instead will unilaterally restrict the issuing of birth certificates to undocumented immigrants’ children in their states. They know a flurry of lawsuits will follow and hope the resulting legal conflict will be resolved in their favor.

Most Constitutional scholars consider the states’ effort to restrict birth certificates patently unconstitutional. “This is political theater, not a serious effort to create a legal test,” said Gabriel J. Chin, a law professor at the University of Arizona whose grandfather immigrated to the United States from China at a time when ethnic Chinese were excluded from the country. “It strikes me as unwise, un-American and unconstitutional.”

Despite being called “anchor babies,” the children of undocumented immigrants born in the United States cannot actually prevent their parents from being deported. It is not until they reach the age of 21 the children are able to file paperwork to sponsor their parents for citizenship. The parents remain vulnerable until that point.

A study released in August by the Pew Hispanic Center found about 340,000 children were born to undocumented immigrants in the United States in 2008 and became instant citizens.

Immigrant advocates say racism is driving the measure. “They call themselves patriots, but they pick and choose which parts of the Constitution they support.”

Scholars who have studied migration over the years say it is the desire for better-paying jobs, not a passport for their children, that is the primary motivator for people to leave their homes for the United States.

How the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) prevented Mexican Americans from obtaining Immigration Reform in lieu of thirty pieces of silver for Puerto Ricans.

There are obviously many congressmen in Washington who understand the importance of their role to support issues or to vote to approve federal legislation.

In order to obtain the required votes approving Health Care Reform, votes became a trading commodity of value and one who was astute was Congressman Bart Stupak from Michigan.

Congressman Stupak's playbook on trading his one vote for Obama's Executive Order stating no funds would be used for abortion was central to negotiating a compromise with the Obama administration in passing the health care bill in March.

Stupak had one vote to trade. He only obligation was to the constituents of his district.

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus had 21 votes. The mandate of the CHC was to serve the needs of all Hispanics in the United States.

For 90% of America's Hispanics, namely Mexican Americans and all others from Mexico, Central and South America who must comply with draconian regulations to enter the United States with a visa, Immigration Reform is the most important issue across the United States of America.

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus should have traded their votes for Immigration Reform with a commitment from Obama to vigorously pursue its passage with the same intensity as he did for Health Care Reform.

Instead of Immigration Reform, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) traded their 21 votes to support Health Care Reform Reform in return for $7.3 Billion for health care benefits for Puerto Rico.

Congresswoman Nydia M. Velázquez saw a gigantic opportunity for Puerto Rico and gleefully accepted $7.3 Billion for Puerto Rico.

How the former Congressional Hispanic Caucus chairperson, Congresswoman Nydia M. Velázquez, a Puerto Rican American politician was able to manipulate members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to trade their votes for health care benefits for Puerto Ricans in lieu of a commitment from Obama to pursue Immigration Reform is a great coup for Puerto Ricans at the expense of Mexican Americans, Central and South Americans living the anguish and pain of Arizona SB 1070 spreading Apartheid across the USA as a killing cancer.

It is important to understand, Puerto Ricans are citizens of the United States and they have no hindrance entering or leaving the United States which is polar opposite of the way many Mexicans die in the Arizona desert trying to enter the Untied States or are arrested in Arizona by Sheriff Joe Arpaio for having a brown face.

It is important to point out it was Mexican American voters that elected Barack Obama President of the United States. Mexican American and other voters from Central and South America delivered California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Florida — and arguably North Carolina, Indiana and Pennsylvania.

Mexican Americans make up 64% of the Hispanic population in the United States with 9% from Puerto Rican and 3% Cuban.

Citizens from Mexico, Central and South America all have to adhere and abide severe visa requirements for permission to enter the United States. Puerto Ricans are American citizens and Cubans have special expedited processes for entry in to the United States. This is why Puerto Ricans and Cubans have no empathy for undocumented migrants.

Unfortunately, Immigration Reform was not a concern for Velázquez or the Mexican American U.S. congressmen of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus resulting in Immigration Reform not given any consideration.

The decision to have the CHC vote "yes" on Health Care Reform knocked down a huge roadblock in reaching the necessary 216 votes for final passage by the U.S. House of Representatives.

Immigration Reform should be the highest Hispanic priority in the USA but other than Congressman Gutierrez, there is no national advocacy. None of the Mexican American members of the CHC are national voices for Immigration Reform. All who do not support the Dream Act and all who voted for Puerto Rico health care benefits instead of demanding Immigration Reform from Obama should all be replaced in the 2012 elections.

In private conversations, members of the CHC said the decision was reached after the unavoidable realization the Health Care bill couldn’t survive without their votes.

“The whole yolk of defeat would be on the 20 people in that room,” said a member of the CHC, “And that was a fact.”

What is unbelievable is how the Mexican American members of the CHC could have allowed Velázquez to shanghai the votes of the CHC for Puerto Rico in lieu of Immigration Reform.

It is obvious members of the CHC did not know the extent of the racism being expounded in Arizona leading to Apartheid in Arizona. The sadness of this is if they did not know, then they do not deserve to represent Hispanics in the United States Congress.

The result of the CHC votes for Puerto Rico in lieu of Immigration Reform is now the vehicle for Arizona becoming an Apartheid state as evident of the shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Giffords.

Arizona SB 1070 is now a killing cancer quickly spreading across the entire United States.

The United States Supreme Court

The probability is high, the appeal of Arizona Law SB1070 will be decided 5-4 by the United States Supreme Court overturning a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruling upholding Arizona SB 1070.

If Arizona SB 1070 is upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, SB 1070 becomes the law of the entire United States of America.

The only alternative to end SB 1070 is passage of Immigration Reform that addresses the needs of all undocumented. Due to the selfishness and ignorance of former Chairperson

Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.) and the irresponsible Mexican American members of congress, this option is dead, deportations will continue, the Dream Act is dead, citizenship birthright is next and Apartheid rampant in Arizona is spreading across the United States.

Ignorance, selfishness and stupidity are the reasons why the Congressional Hispanic Caucus allowed Velazquez to shanghai the votes of the CHC for Puerto Rico in lieu of Immigration Reform.

What is the next step for Hispanics? Hispanic News using the Hispanic

Posada to build a national constituency of all Americans

Discontent presently fills the air in Hispanic political circles, giving blame to President Obama.

Hispanic community feelings run deep on the subject of immigration reform. Nothing is more painful to the Hispanic voter coalition than the vision of beloved, upstanding children, educated in American schools, being deported to countries they barely know because years ago, their parents brought them to the U.S. for a better, poverty-free life.

California pastor Ryan J. Bell reflected prevailing political bitterness over the DREAM Act defeat in his article: Still No Room in the Inn:

"It is more than a little ironic Jesus, within days of his birth, found himself immigrating to Egypt with his family to escape the tyranny of King Herod the Great who ordered the execution of all male children in Judea. Had he grown up in similar circumstances in our country, Jesus would have been the perfect candidate for the DREAM Act."

"Many of the children who come to this country without proper documentation, come... for the same reasons Jesus fled to Egypt ― to escape poverty or physical danger (or both) and to seek better opportunities for themselves and their children."

"Many of the 41 Senators who voted against the DREAM Act sing songs celebrating the birth of Jesus and shower one another with gifts they might bear in mind Jesus lived and died for precisely the people who would most benefit from legislation like the DREAM Act. In fact, Jesus was one of those immigrant kids himself."

Mathew Kessler, writes in Traveling with Mary and Joseph Praying Las Posadas : The Bible mentions the travels of countless personalities: Abram and Sarai left Ur and set out for Canaan. The people of Israel traveled from slavery in Egypt to a new life and identity in the Promised Land.

Elijah ran to escape the army of Jezebel, who wanted him killed. Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem for the census, where God provided them shelter as God had provided shelter for their ancestors. And the Second Vatican Council evoked strong biblical images when it called the Catholic Church a “pilgrim Church” (Lumen Gentium 48).

Hispanics experience God here and now. They know God travels with them whether they are migrants from Mexico thinning beets in Colorado, dishwashers from Guatemala in St. Louis, gardeners from Venezuela in Chicago, or garment workers from Ecuador in New York.

For nine days before Christmas, Hispanics remember the journey of Joseph and Mary as they searched for a posada (lodging) in Bethlehem. Throughout small pueblos and in the neighborhoods of large cities, Hispanics relive the anxiety of the holy couple. They also add prayers for their loved ones who have made a trip to the north in search of a better life.

Las Posadas is a touching ceremony that can help Christians today see the real needs of those who live without the security of health insurance, a steady job, or a loving family.

The adapted version of Las Posadas was written to help make Advent a more intense period of reflection on the God who has a “preferential option for the poor.” It can be used to begin a meal and can provide some focus for the meal conversation, if people are willing.

May this novena stir hearts to make room for those who travel and do not know what they will eat or where they will sleep tonight.

The 2012 Presidential Election

After the DREAM Act was killed, President Obama lamented the defeat as "An incredibly disappointing vote... It is disappointing common sense did not prevail today... Moving forward, my administration will continue to do everything we can to fix our nation's broken immigration system so we can provide lasting and dedicated resources for our border security."

To Hispanic voters, President Obama's tepid words sounded like so much "blah blah blah." All pretty words, no heartfelt action, no genuine commitment, certainly no empathy.

President Obama must do more than provide cheap and easy talk to continue to draw Hispanic voter support.

Obama must be seen walking the walk of humanitarian Immigration Reform, not border security, to be re-elected in 2012.

Obama will have to persuade Hispanics ― who turned out for him in record numbers in key states in 2008 ― to do so again, despite the lack of progress on Immigration Reform.

As for Immigration Reform, in 2008, when Obama was elected president, Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress. if Obama could not win Immigration Reform when Democrats were the majorities in both houses of congress, the probability of Immigration Reform approval in 2013 will need much more than Obama.

We can't put our hope in Obama again. We need a national spokesman to mobilize a constituency of Americans to support Immigration Reform using America's churches as the fulcrum to have all Americans remember and accept America is still the land of immigrants. All need to understand it takes as much as 20 years for someone to enter the United States using the visa process now in place. To Hispanics, Immigration Reform must change draconian requirements and family sponsored immigration must be preserved.

As for Obama, he lacks empathy for Hispanics.

The Hispanic population growing as projected by the U.S. Census Bureau, will some day be the majority population in America, even if today, the border is completely sealed.

Obama is simply not a good fit with Hispanics. 

As for 2012, Hispanics don't have to switch sides on election day ― they just have to abstain from voting for Obama as they vote for members of congress that boldly support Immigration Reform.

Obama will not have a second term in office without enthusiastic Hispanic voters voting for him at the 2012 polls.

I endorsed President Obama in 2008 but I will not vote for the re-election of President Obama in 2012.

I think Hispanics need to support someone other than Obama on the 2012 Democratic ticket.

Lastly, all congressional members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who voted for health care benefits for Puerto Rico in lieu of having Obama make Immigration Reform a priority need to be identified and replaced in the 2012 elections. As stated above, if Arizona SB 1070 is upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, SB 1070 becomes the law of the land and everyone needs to understand, SB 1070 is euphuism for Apartheid as practiced once in South Africa.

The only alternative to end SB 1070 is passage of Immigration Reform that addresses the needs of all undocumented. Due to the selfishness and ignorance of former Chairperson Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.), this option is dead, deportations will continue, the Dream Act is dead, citizenship birthright is next and Apartheid is rampant in Arizona and spreading across the United States similar to an unstoppable fire spreading across the prairie of America's heartland.

In regards to all members of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate who have a significant population of Hispanics in their home state or home district, these elected officials must now come off the sidelines and boldly become involved in representing all their constituents, not just some of them.

It is not acceptable for members of congress whose home districts or states have significant populations of Hispanics not be members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus supporting legislation to benefit America's Hispanics. What benefits America, benefits home states and congressional districts.

It is not enough for some members of congress to be only members of caucuses and committees of their own interests. In my home state of New Mexico, Senator Jeff Bingaman is chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

New Mexico's Hispanic population is 45.1% (2008, Pew Hispanic Center) and growing. Senator Bingaman is not a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. He should be. Does he mistakenly think membership on the CHC is only open to Hispanic legislators? It appears Bingaman does not understand senate rules on how caucuses work or he just does not care about the issues the CHC thinks important.

For those who are silent, not visible and who do not boldly articulate, advocate and represent all their constituents on issues important for all constituents back home and in Washington D.C., the 2012 elections should be used to replace them with those who will represent all constituents of their districts or states.

Lastly, regarding the 2012 presidential election: How does enthusiasm become re-kindled? For starters, Obama must:

1. End deportations.

2. Fire Janet Napolitano and John Norton.

3. Not run for re-election for a second term.

If you agree with this article, help spread it across the USA. Click Jon@JonGarrido.com then add someone's email address and forward to an individual or your email list.

Contact me below to start a chapter in your state, city, town, village.