Recent news reports indicate that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus has secured the House Democratic leadership's agreement that none of several enforcement and employment immigration benefit expansion bills lately introduced would move forward to a hearing or a committee vote. Doubtless, advocates of employment based immigration and increased immigration enforcement will try to attach their pet provisions to must-pass legislation later this year. However, we believe it is unlikely that any benefit or enforcement bill will be acted upon without confronting the elephant in the room - legalization. Last month, comprehensive immigration reform was within about 30 House votes of passage - that was the margin by which the discharge petition for the Shuler enforcement bill fell short. It is instructive to note that the House Hispanic Caucus was prepared to accept a 5-year temporary status for the undocumented if the Shuler enforcement bill had moved to a floor vote. This marks a significant concession by the Hispanic Caucus in that they did not seek a path to permanent residency, and also shows how serious the Caucus is in insisting that nothing significant on immigration move without legalization (which apparently now means a temporary status, not a permanent one).

The political situation of the three legs of the immigration stool - legalization, increases in employment immigration, and enforcement is as follows.

++For those in the public who want to see increased immigration enforcement, the stark reality is that such enforcement is, and will continue to be, severely under-funded. That is because it is Congressional policy to pass tough laws and then not to enforce them too much. That way, Congress gets to be popular with both sides of the immigration issue, something hard to fault Congress for in a democracy. Furthermore, even the hard core enforcement supporters in Congress are ready to make a deal on legalization so long as the overall terms are palatable to them. The noisy Lou Dobbs supporters who decry any form of legalization as unacceptable are just a bargaining chip to be bartered away at the first suitable opportunity by their own heroes in Congress. ++For those who want legalization, the reality is even worse. For starters, the undocumented cannot vote, and many of their near and dear ones still await naturalization. Their supporters in Congress have already given up on a path to permanent residency, and the legalization process, once enacted, is likely to be both expensive and unforgiving of even minor technical errors. In addition, it is highly probable that entire family categories will be eliminated as a price for legalization. True legalization will have to await the resurrection of 212(c), something for which there are no champions for in Congress today. ++For those who want a better correspondence between our economic needs and our immigration laws, in the form of increased legal immigration numbers, the reality is still worse. Numerically, they are the weakest of the three immigration lobbies, and are squeezed uncomfortably between the other two. They would like to solve tomoro's immigration numbers without taking a stand on how to deal with yesterday's undocumented immigrants - not a good way to get support from either of the other two lobbies. The employment immigration advocates and the undocumented advocates are both in the same benefits boat, and unless they can work together, they cannot make a deal with enforcement advocates.

For better or for worse, comprehensive immigration reform appears to be the only way that would be politically assured of Congressional passage. The earlier all sides recognize this, the better off they, and America, will be.

We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to mailto:editor at ilw dot com.