From the proposal to build a wall across the United States southern border to rounding up every undocumented immigrant for deportation, the logistics, expense and feasibility of any proposal addressing immigration issues are going to be difficult, particularly in the current economy. With current societal divisions, any political suggestion will be under hot debate and scrutiny.
While the Colorado Republicans have not come up with a united stand on immigration, the national Republican platform concentrates on enforcement of current immigration laws to ensure national security. The Colorado Democrats have general humanitarian statements about the issue, including support of economic improvement in countries where immigrants originate. The Democrats also state support for a law allowing some higher education funding to children of illegal immigrants and oppose a law funding immigration enforcement by local law agencies.
Colorado Republican Headquarters Chairman Dick Wadhams admitted, “There is no more united view among Republicans than there is among Democrats.”
Wadhams noted the need for “secure borders” was the first and foremost concern.
Commenting on the question of jobs, he said, “There is a point of view that jobs are being taken over by illegals, but the jobs in question are either in agriculture, jobs Americans are unwilling to do, or highly-skilled positions that employers must prove cannot be filled by Americans prior to sponsoring an immigrant/employee.”
Wadhams said it was a delicate balance between meeting the needs of American business and appeasing the public with the wide range of debate in both the Republican and Democratic parties.
Democratic Platform Outlines High Hopes
Colorado Democratic Headquarters spokesperson Bill Compton also said, “There’s no monolithic view among candidates,” but referred to the Democrats’ platform.
Whatever the debate may be on Capitol Hill, the platform does offer some point of reconciliation. Between colloquialisms about the United States being a “diverse nation built by people from all parts of the world,” and rejection of the “politics of division and isolation efforts by any candidate for office that sow fear and xenophobia against any person or community,” there are specific points mapping strategies for dealing with immigration issues.
The Democratic platform of Colorado supports restoration of medical and other benefits to legal immigrants, based on equal protection of the law. The 1996 Welfare Reform law made most legal immigrants, regardless of length of residence in the United States, “ineligible for health care, welfare and other essential programs.” The platform looks to reverse the 1996 law on federal, state and local levels for all documented immigrants.
The platform calls for the repeal of the Clear Law Enforcement for Alien Removal (CLEAR) Act of 2005 (H.R. 3137). The law offers funding to any state or local law enforcement agency for immigration enforcement as part of routine law enforcement, but has made victims of crime, who also happen to be undocumented immigrants, reluctant to report the crime for fear of their own deportation.
The platform states the desire for uniform laws and nationwide enforcement. The platform also states a desire to remove the control of immigration enforcement from the Colorado General Assembly and place it back into the hands of the U.S. Congress.
While the platform is eloquent in supporting “comprehensive, humane reform of immigration and labor laws to provide protection for the labor force; to prevent exploitation; to provide stricter health and safety inspections; and provide the opportunity for farm workers to engage in collective bargaining,” no language in the document outlines how the Democrats propose to accomplish these goals.
The Democrats are vocal about supporting existing legislation to penalize businesses that either recruit or hire illegal immigrants. They also promote funding for existing border control and a guest worker program, which would include a path to citizenship for undocumented workers and their families. This becomes a point of contention between not only the parties but candidates within each. Some view this as amnesty while others see it as the only solution to protect the economy from further erosion.
One of the difficulties for legal immigrants is the time frame between application, acceptance, immigration, legal residency and citizenship. In spite of the technology available today, the process is long and arduous. The Democrats’ platform calls for the “establishment of an expedited process,” and once documented, equal rights to services provided by law including an “immigrant driver’s license.”
In recent years, issues have been raised over the access of undocumented immigrant children to higher education. No current laws deal with children who have been brought to the U.S. by undocumented immigrant parents. Because the only avenue to immigrant status or citizenship in the U.S. is through the parents, regardless of how long they have lived here, children of illegal immigrants are also considered illegally in the country with no means of gaining legal status.
The federal DREAM Act (Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors), originally introduced under a different name and version in 2001, has undergone several changes along the path to gaining educational rights for children of illegal immigrants. Much of the acceptance of the law has come from the Department of Defense, making military service as one of the routes to legal status for grown children (age 15 through 30). While illegal immigrants are technically ineligible for military service, they have been accepted when recruitment numbers need boosting.
The Colorado Democrat platform supports the DREAM Act with the inclusion of civil service participation in lieu of military service and the immigrant student would have to meet several other parameters to be eligible for legal status. The law is still changing and under debate.
The platform also addresses the need for U.S. trade agreements and foreign policy to support economic development in other countries. Foreign policy would include the “use of incentives” to help improve the standard of living and increase work opportunities, ostensibly to curb the flow of immigrants to the U.S. The incentives are not defined.
The final word on immigration and undocumented aliens deals with “equal rights.” In writing the Democratic platform, the author or authors may have been more accurate with the term “human rights.” The argument most often given against “equal rights” is that undocumented immigrants are in the U.S. illegally and as such, are criminals, undeserving of any rights. The last two paragraphs of the platform, verbatim, are as follows:
“We oppose institutionalization of undocumented immigrants as a marked and permanent underclass, and oppose the classification of illegal immigration as a criminal offense. Undocumented immigrants who have committed no criminal offense should not be subject to incarceration other than temporary detention.
“We reject attempts to provoke isolation and xenophobia (fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners) against particular groups or communities among us, including our newest immigrant members.”
Republican Platform Focuses On Security
The Republican Party has no written platform on the state level in Colorado, but one can be found at the national Republican web site. This national platform proved to be the same platform created prior to the 2004 Bush presidential campaign. Out of 92 pages, two paragraphs are devoted to immigration issues under the main heading: “Strengthening Our Communities,” and a subheading: “Supporting Humane and Legal Immigration.”
The Republican Party supports immigration reform but does not indicated specific measures, only the need to ensure it is “legal, safe and humane,” and that any proposed reform be structured to “address the needs of national security.”
The Republican stand on amnesty is ambiguous. In one statement, “…President Bush has proposed a new temporary worker program [as of 2004] that applies when no Americans can be found to fill the jobs. This new program would allow workers who currently hold jobs to come out of the shadows and to participate legally in America’s economy. It would allow men and women who enter the program to apply for citizenship in the same manner as those who apply from outside the United States.”
One sentence beyond this, however, insists the Republicans “oppose amnesty because it would have the effect of encouraging illegal immigration and would give an unfair advantage to those who have broken our laws.”
The debate rages in both the Democrat and Republican parties as to whether the temporary worker program isn’t itself a form of “amnesty.”
The Republican platform also makes a small reference to opposition and penalization of employers who violate the immigration laws, but does not go into any detail as to what penalties might be imposed or how they may be applied.
The immigration portion of the platform reiterates information previously included under the heading “Homeland Security.” It recommends continued use of the “US-VISIT system, which uses bio-metric data to better track the entry and exit of foreign travelers,” to better ensure legal entry to the U.S. This system, as of 2004, was in place at more than “115 airports” and being implemented at land border crossings as well. Other means of securing our borders included an increase of “reconnaissance cameras, border patrol agents and unmanned aerial flights.”
The Illegal Immigration and Reform Act of 1996, in effect as of August 2004 and supported in the Republican platform, gave expansive authority to law enforcement agents who now patrol our borders. In previous years, suspected illegal aliens were remanded to the immigration courts, which heard asylum claims and other appeals to remain in the U.S.
The law now extends the powers of the border patrol agents, allowing them to deport immigrants having been in the U.S. for more than 14 days and found within 100 miles of the Mexico or Canada borders, “without having first to go through the cumbersome process of allowing the illegal alien to have a hearing before an immigration judge.” The law was intended to focus on immigrants from countries other than Mexico or Canada.
The debate is ongoing in the two major political parties and how we expect to reach agreement on the laws governing immigration remains to be seen.
