National Journal:
By Major Garrett
July 3, 2014
More
than a dozen center-left and hard-left immigration groups sent
representatives to what sounded like another uninspiring strategy
session in the White House's Roosevelt
Room with senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett and Cecilia Munoz, head
of the Domestic Policy Council.
It
was early Monday afternoon, and none of the participants seated around
the long rectangular table had any inkling President Obama was pissed.
They would soon find out.
Moreover, they would discover, to their surprise, that Obama was no
longer pissed at them, but with them. This being a meeting of Democratic
allies, of course, some of the groups eventually found a way to get
Obama pissed off at them all over again—over the
issue of unaccompanied minors at the border.
But
first, the story of the day was that Obama became unplugged on
immigration, took his temper off mute, shook up the underlying base
politics of the next two elections,
and turned up to boil his long-simmering feud with Republicans over the
constitutional limits of executive power.
Jarrett
and Munoz called the meeting to order and, according to participants,
expectations were low and anxiety high. A quick look around the table
revealed the still-smoldering
wound Obama felt after being branded "deporter-in-chief." The authoress
of the hottest barb ever directed at Obama by the Left, Janet Murguia
of the National Council of La Raza, was conspicuously absent. No
representative of La Raza was even invited.
It was hard for anyone to imagine new possibilities for the White House with this schism so apparent.
Those
who were there—the Service Employees International Union; AFL-CIO;
Center for American Progress; Leadership Council on Civil Rights;
America's Voice; the National
Immigration Law Center; United Farm Workers; Center for Community
Change; and others—expected another dreary appeal from Jarrett and Munoz
to give House Speaker John Boehner until the August recess to try to
move some form of immigration legislation. The immigration
groups were fed up with what they had long regarded as Obama's doughy
diffidence and had no stomach for another "stay-the-course" soliloquy
from Jarrett and Munoz.
What
the immigration advocates couldn't help noticing were the two empty
chairs at the center of the table on the Oval Office side of the
Roosevelt Room, opposite the
visitors' entrance.
Jarrett
and Munoz sat on either side of the empty chairs and White House
counsel Neil Eggleston was to Munoz's right. Jarrett and Munoz were in
the opening stanza of their
immigration update when Obama and Vice President Joe Biden walked in
and sat down. They stayed for more than an hour, Obama doing most of the
talking and never referring to notes. Biden chimed in only when, later
on, the debate turned to the current border
crisis over unaccompanied minors.
Obama
told the group that Boehner had informed him on June 24 there would be
no votes on immigration before the midterm election but that he believed
there was a good
chance a comprehensive bill could pass in the next Congress. The
president also told the group that Boehner urged him not to press ahead
with executive action because that would make legislating more difficult
next year.
Obama
told the group, according to those present, his response to Boehner
was: "Sorry about that. I'm going to keep my promise and move forward
with executive action soon."
In
the room, there was something of a collective, electric gasp. The
assembled immigration-rights groups had been leaning hard on Obama for
months to use executive action
to sidestep Congress and privately mocked what they regarded as
Pollyanna hopes that House Republicans would budge. They had been burned
before. Obama reversed himself in late March and slammed the brakes on
Homeland Security Department studies of slowing
deportations in the name of "humane" treatment, all in the name of
giving House Republicans more time on immigration reform.
Ever since, immigration groups on the left despaired over Obama's credulous paralysis. Protests ensued.
Not
any longer. Obama told the groups what they had been dying to hear—that
he was going to condemn House Republicans for inaction and set the most
expansive legal course
permissible to beef up border security, slow deportations of
noncriminal aliens, and provide legal status to millions of undocumented
workers—all by himself.
"He
went from hanging back to calling the question and retaking the
initiative," said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice.
"I kept thinking, 'Where has
this guy been?' He's going on offense. He was a different guy. He was
unplugged. After months of him and his team being angry with advocates
for putting pressure on him to take executive action, it became clear he
was no longer going to use the prospect of
legislation to deflect attention and pressure from him."
Obama
made it clear he would press his executive powers to the limit. He gave
quiet credence to recommendations from La Raza and other immigration
groups that between
5 million to 6 million adult illegal immigrants could be spared
deportation under a similar form of deferred adjudication he ordered for
the so-called Dreamers in June 2012.
Obama
has now ordered the Homeland Security and Justice departments to find
executive authorities that could enlarge that non-prosecutorial umbrella
by a factor of 10.
Senior officials also tell me Obama wants to see what he can do with
executive power to provide temporary legal status to undocumented
adults. And he will shift Immigration Control and Enforcement resources
from the interior to the border to reduce deportations
of those already here and to beef up defenses along the border.
"Things
were getting ragged with some of the immigration groups," said Marshall
Fitz, director of immigration policy at the Center for American
Progress. "Many of us had
long drawn the conclusion the House Republicans were not going to
budge. After Obama spoke, the vibe was, 'Wow. This is a very clear, very
serious pivot.' "
There
ensued a brief debate about the underlying politics of executive action
in the shadow of the midterm elections—whether it would motivate
Latinos and progressives
in larger numbers than tea-party-inspired GOP voters; would it cut for
or against Senate Democrats in red states like Louisiana, Arkansas,
Alaska, North Carolina, and Georgia; and how it would play in 2016.
"He didn't seem to give a shit," Sharry said. "It was clear he was going on offense and going to run to the question."
Within
the White House, the sense is that Obama's coming moves on immigration
will not help anywhere but Colorado and possibly Virginia. Advisers
hope, perhaps unrealistically,
there will be a red-state push. The 2016 calculus is completely
different. Inside and outside the White House, the consensus is that GOP
inaction on immigration reform will define the campaign and any
attempts to draft legislation in the next Congress—with
or without a GOP majority in the Senate and the House—will complicate
political prospects for Republicans seeking the presidential nomination
and for Senate Republicans up for reelection in blue states, people like
Florida (Marco Rubio), Illinois (Mark Kirk),
Iowa (Chuck Grassley), Ohio (Rob Portman), Wisconsin (Ron Johnson), and
Pennsylvania (Pat Toomey).
But
that's not the end of the immigration story, politically or otherwise.
The fury over Obama's looming executive actions will come. And it will
be loud. But the current
crisis over unaccompanied minors at the southern border is also a prism
for Obama's willingness to use the law to deport illegals—even children
in desperate circumstances.
That
issue also arose in the Roosevelt Room, and it drove a deep wedge
between Obama and the immigration groups reunited moments before around
the executive-action strategy.
According
to those present, Obama was focused entirely on future executive
actions when Gustavo Torres of CASA de Maryland asked about the
unaccompanied minors and Obama's
desire to expand his power to deport the children, returning them, in
most cases, to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Obama said his goal
was to provide humanitarian assistance, speed up the processing of the
cases under the law, and ask Congress for
up to $3 billion for housing and temporary courts to process and deport
those without legal standing.
To
many in the Roosevelt Room, this sounded technocratic and procedural
and borderline inhumane. Marielena Hincapie, executive director of the
Los Angeles office of the
National Immigration Law Center, urged Obama to look at the human
tragedy of children fleeing violence in their home countries and
consider whether swift deportations would deny them due process.
Obama,
according to those present, argued forcefully that the U.S. had to
signal its intent to enforce the law through deportations and that
failure to do so could lead
more children to die en route to the southern border or take scandalous
risks by traveling with smugglers or on the roofs of trains. He could
not, in good conscience, give any remotely encouraging signal to
children or their parents to risk their lives, as
many had already done in coming to America's doorstep.
Angelica
Salas, executive director of Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of
Los Angeles, piped up and warned Obama that the driving energy to reach
the United States
could not be stopped. "Mr. President, when my family and I came to the
country, I was 5 years old, and when we were caught crossing the border
and were sent back, we didn't give up," Salas said. "We kept trying
until we made it."
Obama,
according to those present, would have none of it. Kids all over the
world have it tough, he said. Even children in America who live in
dangerous neighborhoods
would like to live somewhere else, but he can't solve everyone's
problems. He told the groups he had to enforce the law—even if that
meant deporting hard cases with minors involved. Sometimes, there is an
inherent injustice in where you are born, and no president
can solve that, Obama said. But presidents must send the message that
you can't just show up on the border, plead for asylum or refugee
status, and hope to get it.
"Then
anyone can come in, and it means that, effectively, we don't have any
kind of system," Obama said. "We are a nation with borders that must be
enforced."
The
discussion ended amicably if unsatisfactorily. Obama thanked the
advocates for their passion and said he understood their concerns about
due process for unaccompanied
minors but remained resolute about deportations.
"The
issue is real, and the solutions are unattainable in the short term,"
said Fitz of American Progress. "Everyone understood that. The families
of these children are
making a dire decision, and the president didn't want that decision
infused with the false hope that there was a golden ticket waiting for
them on the border. "
In
this regard, Obama has aligned himself with congressional Republicans,
even though they acknowledge it only rhetorically. Obama will soon ask
Congress for more power
to deport the unaccompanied minors, rankling Democrats like Sen. Robert
Menendez, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. Menendez was
displeased when briefed last week on Obama's enforcement plans. House
Republicans may prove receptive to the money and
the deportation authority when it comes time to write a continuing
resolution.
Either
way, Obama's now struck his own path on the larger issue of
comprehensive immigration reform and unaccompanied minors on the border,
pleasing no one completely
in the process.
Obama's Independence Day came June 30, four days early. On this issue, it was, and will remain, a day to remember.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment