Ambivalence After White House Immigration Reform Meeting Featuring Obama and Napolitano

Obama keeps revving the immigration reform engine, advocates want to take it for a spin already. (Photo: The White House)

Obama keeps revving the immigration reform engine, advocates want to take it for a spin already. (Photo: The White House)

The second White House meeting on immigration reform under President Barack Obama went well. Or did it? It depends on whom you ask.

Much like the overall situation since Obama took office, the meeting left room for conflicting interpretations: some came out thinking the president is committed to passing immigration reform despite his overloaded agenda, others emerged with a sense that Obama and Homeland Security Sec. Janet Napolitano need to start backing up their promises with action.

A glass half-full example: Politico‘s headline, “Obama addresses immigration reform,” when all the president did was show up at the meeting to give a brief pep talk.

Glass half-empty: The Wall Street Journal’s take, “Some Hear More PR, Less Policy at White House Immigration Meeting.”

The meeting did give advocates a chance to express some of their frustration with the administration’s approach.

“President Obama and Secretary Napolitano remain committed to comprehensive immigration reform, know that enforcement of our out-dated laws alone is no solution, and understood when we told them that pro-reform constituencies are growing impatient,” said a statement from the executive director of the National Immigration Forum, Ali Noorani, who was in the meeting.

“…Obama reaffirmed his commitment to comprehensive immigration reform in this Congress. Secretary Napolitano also made it clear that she received our message that she has to communicate more effectively in favor of reform,” said a statement from America’s Voice executive director Frank Sharry.

“But as always, the proof will be in the pudding. What we are looking for going forward is public advocacy for comprehensive immigration reform from Secretary Napolitano, a concrete proposal presented in Congress early this fall, and continued promotion of this urgent issue by the President.”

Participants in the meeting –which included business leaders and law enforcement representatives– were divided into small groups to discuss specific issues.

Afterwards, when Napolitano was getting ready to answer questions, according to The Wall Street Journal, “Obama walked into the room — surprise, surprise — and gave a pep talk. With that, the meeting ended, letting Napolitano off the hook. Some advocates had been looking for a chance to vent their dissatisfaction with the administration’s enforcement approach, part of Napolitano’s responsibilities.”

Noorani of the National Immigration Forum pointed in his statement to the one bit of news that could be of significance: Obama made his most forceful –though not very forceful– statement yet regarding the 287(g) program.

“The president said specifically that when it comes to the local police charged with enforcing federal immigration law under 287(g) agreements that he wants these local law enforcement agencies held accountable.

“We continue to oppose expanding 287(g) agreements and other expansions of state and local involvement in federal enforcement issues, but we intend to make sure the president follows through on holding these police forces accountable.

“For example, it will be hard to feel that this administration is serious about taking a new approach to enforcement when bad actors like Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona continue to conduct sweeps through Latino neighborhoods under the authority of 287(g).”

Such a statement follows a familiar pattern with Obama and immigration: the president talks about what he wants done, but he does not say what he will do to get it done.

6 comments

  1. drosenthal

    Legal immigration is what made this country great- illegal immigration is what is ruining it. Possessing neither a green card nor a valid social security number, they may work to support themselves (or not) and to send money home, but do not pay tax or social security, yet the rest of us provide them with free education for their children, free health care, food subsidies and low cost housing, even though, as illegal aliens, they have broken our laws and are actually criminals. The government not only continues to ignore this fact–we don’t even deport those who commit crimes here. What’s wrong with this picture?

  2. Cohen

    I am sick of waiting! A comprehensive immigration reform must happen this year. History will judge us for our inhuman treatment of millions of hard-working immigrants!

  3. Immigrants are the new Jews. My boyfriend has been fighting removal for 8 years. He’s a Canadian LPR with a very strong appeal against the Board of Immigration Appeals. In the meantime, DHS has duped the surety company into forfeiting his bond.

    In short, the government agency charged with keeping us safe from terrorists would put my bf in captivity over an expunged 1978 misdemeanor. Who knew that a $50 8-track tape deck would put him on the wrong end of the DOJ and DHS. Scary place to be.

    Lea Reiter

    @leareiter on twitter

  4. yusuf

    If You deport them, The legal permanent residents who have commited a crime, and they paid into social security. Give them their money when you are puting them out the country, because who keeps that money when immigration laws dont let them get it? Who?

  5. RDP

    This is ridiculous. All American should oppose legalization to the illegal immigrants. We did amnesty in 1986 and 2001. what happened? A flood of more and more illegal immigration here. The United States is the country of law. How come you give amnesty to people who broke the law. There are millions of people are waiting on line to enter the US legally. My friend has sponsored his sister and her family on legal way bet they are waiting more than 10 years. His other relative came here illegally in 1999 used President Clinton’s amnesty program and got green card in 2002 and citizenship in 2007. Where is fairness? Rewarding the illegal, who broke the law, not paying tax and SS, using fake SSN and driving license. On other hand punishing legals who are patiently waiting for years and years? Wake up my fellow American and contact your vote greedy politicians (Democrats in particularly)

  6. Ari Brenner

    In response to Cohen’s comment above, I do agree that immigration reform seems to have been sidelined recently with the several massive other topics percolating in Washington. This results in situations with nuance as this blog entry discusses: Different media outlets take away different things from discussions, and overall no constituency is happy.

    I personally would like to see a reformed stance by our federal government, and am disappointed (though unsurprised) that issues such as health care and economic stimulus are taking the lion’s share of the focus. I also think that the impatience (discussed in the blog) will not serve pro-immigration reform proponents in the long run, but that it will exacerbate tensions from the other side.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *