Faint Immigration Praise

“Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer And, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer" ~ Alexander Pope, poet, satirist, and translator, “Epistle to Dr Arbuthnot

clock face time 3.jpgI hesitate to criticize the Obama Administration's immigration reform measures, having urged long ago that half a loaf, at least for now, will perforce suffice

Hastily announced but untimely in manifestation, the slew of executive half-measures the President's team has lately proposed to improve the functioning of America's broken immigration system seem reminiscent more of vaporware than tangible solutions. 

With less than a year to go on his term, executive orders and departmental or agency press releases are spewing forth as if from a Gatling gun

Will these concepts really make a difference?  Or are they merely pheromones to attract progressive, young or Hispanic voters in November?

Consider how much has been said but so little done:

  • Prosecutorial Discretion is announced as a measure to spare low-level immigration violators and slam dangerous foreign felons.  So far the record deportations continue almost unabated and the few granted PD are permitted to remain at the pleasure of the President but without deferred action and its benefit of work permission.
  • Stateside waiver processing for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens whose hardship can be proven as extreme is revealed in a seemingly humanitarian Notice of Intent and an FAQ.  But no rules or procedures have yet been published, and the risk of death-by-visa-waiting remains as high as ever.
  • An interdepartmental push to improve visa processing and promote tourism is inscribed in an Executive Order, with special focus on increased consular officers in Brazil and China.  Still, nothing is said about tourists and business visitors from India whose rupees are as easily converted to dollars and spent in our malls.  Worse yet, no reforms are made by the State Department that would moderate consular absolutism and encourage visa officers -- by amendment of the Foreign Affairs Manual -- to extend a welcome mat more often to foreign visitors with lucre to spend.
  • A DHS grab bag of small measures are announced with the goal "to retain highly skilled workers." These ethereal proposals will likely affect only a tiny slice of the job-creating nonimmigrant population. The list of unrealized hopes includes a nebulous assemblage of H-4 dependents married to H-1B workers "who have begun the process of seeking lawful permanent resident status through employment after meeting a minimum period of H-1B status in the U.S."  It also makes note of the leisurely first convening on February 22 of an "Information Summit [at an undisclosed location] in Silicon Valley, CA [where is that? I can't find the city on my California map], that will bring together high-level representatives from the entrepreneurial community, academia, and federal government agencies [first announced on August 2 of last year as step one of the Entrepreneurs in Residence program] to discuss how to maximize current immigration laws' potential to attract foreign entrepreneurial talent."

Desultory blather and high-falutin' promises will not jumpstart job creation. Deeds not words -- published forms, specific eligibility criteria and actual procedures to request new benefits -- are what real administrative reforms require.   

biohazard time.jpgThere are many bold steps that could be taken to improve our dysfunctional system even while Congress remains comatose.  Gary Endelman and Cyrus Mehta suggest a Presidential tweak in the interpretation of green-card counting procedures that would eliminate backlogs and do far more than merely granting spousal work permission "to retain highly skilled workers" ("Why We Can’t Wait: How President Obama Can Erase Immigrant Visa Backlogs with the Stroke of A Pen").  Other proposals have been offered in this blog ("Executive Craftsmanship: Job Creation through Existing Immigration Laws," "The Immigration Appeaser-in-Chief Should Try Some New Ammunition" and "Immigration Reform with the Stroke of a Pen").

When it comes to executive action on immigration, the nation needs a profile in courage not a silhouette of timidity.  The first Tuesday in November is fast approaching.  Time waits for no President.

Comments (4)

Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the end
Sarah E Blackwell - February 5, 2012 3:01 PM

Even if Obama had taken on immigration reform in Congress at the start of his term when he had a Democratic majority, I doubt very much he would have succeeded for the simple reason the Democratic Party is incapable of taking a party line, particularly not on immigration.

Comprehensive immigration reform requires identifying a carrot that will induce sufficient Republicans to cross over and support the initiative. That carrot doesn't have to be related to immigration, but it needs to tie into Republican interests. Maybe extending the Bush tax cuts?

We also need to get a great deal more creative and bold in our thinking about immigration law. For example, we have a long held policy of family unity that underpins our preference relative immigrant visa categories. The waiting lists though make a mockery of the policy. Where's the family unity if your adult son/daughter or brother/sister has to wait 30+ years to reach the top of the waiting list? And where's the humanity of a family unity policy demands that spouses and dependent children of LPRs be separated from their spouse/parent for 4-5 years? There is no family unity policy and hasn't been for many years, so discontinue preference relative visas. Turn the spouses and dependent children of LPRs into immediate relatives so they can immediately emigrate. Grandfather all existing preference relative petitions with a commitment to allow all to enter within 5 years. If we had done that in 1986, we very likely would not be in the situation we are now in.

And if we discontinue preference relative visas, then we might get enough Republicans on board to do something about the 10-12 million people here illegally without demanding they "self-deport."

Angelo A. Paparelli - February 6, 2012 7:47 AM

Dear Sarah:

You raise some very intriguing ideas. It's hard to speculate about "what if"s in Obama's first term. It's also a bitter pill to require extension of unaffordable Bush tax cuts as the price to pay for immigration reform. Discontinuing preference relative petitions with your phase-in plan might be enough to sway the GOP but I doubt the left would agree. I like the concept offered by the Thrd Way: http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/24/opinion/erickson-immigration/index.html

What do you think of it?

Angelo

Sarah E Blackwell - February 6, 2012 8:17 AM

Even if Obama had taken on immigration reform in Congress at the start of his term when he had a Democratic majority, I doubt very much he would have succeeded for the simple reason the Democratic Party is incapable of taking a party line, particularly not on immigration.

Comprehensive immigration reform requires identifying a carrot that will induce sufficient Republicans to cross over and support the initiative. That carrot doesn't have to be related to immigration, but it needs to tie into Republican interests. Maybe extending the Bush tax cuts?

We also need to get a great deal more creative and bold in our thinking about immigration law. For example, we have a long held policy of family unity that underpins our preference relative immigrant visa categories. The waiting lists though make a mockery of the policy. Where's the family unity if your adult son/daughter or brother/sister has to wait 30+ years to reach the top of the waiting list? And where's the humanity of a family unity policy demands that spouses and dependent children of LPRs be separated from their spouse/parent for 4-5 years? There is no family unity policy and hasn't been for many years, so discontinue preference relative visas. Turn the spouses and dependent children of LPRs into immediate relatives so they can immediately emigrate. Grandfather all existing preference relative petitions with a commitment to allow all to enter within 5 years. If we had done that in 1986, we very likely would not be in the situation we are now in.

And if we discontinue preference relative visas, then we might get enough Republicans on board to do something about the 10-12 million people here illegally without demanding they "self-deport."

Sarah E Blackwell - February 6, 2012 8:37 AM

Dear Angelo

The Third Way's proposal is even more draconian than mine since my proposal would still allow them to sponsor their spouses, unmarried dependent children and parents. It seeks to solve the problem of 10-12 million people here illegally, but does not address the issue of preference relative visas in general. The majority of people who would benefit from the Third Way's proposal are Mexican, but what about the Filipino relatives who are languishing on the waiting lists? In terms of fairness, I think complete elimination of preference visas is the better route. Then those visas could be shifted over the employment-based immigrant visa categories.

Extension of the unaffordable Bush tax cuts might seem like a bitter pill to swallow, but any legalization process is going to generate literally billions for the government through filing fees as well as generate jobs in the private and government sectors to process the applications. Those will be jobs that cover the full range of educational requirements from advanced degrees for the lawyers and managers to the GED for the office cleaners. Plus it is likely to generate new tax revenues as people who have been paid cash under the table and not filed tax returns start to be paid proper wages and file tax returns. I think the additional government revenue will more than offset the revenue lost through extension of the Bush tax cuts.

Look forward to your thoughts.

Sarah

Post a comment

Fill out this form to add a comment to the discussion