Editorial
Grading City Hall: How is L.A.'s city controller doing so far?

Opinion L.A.

Opinion Opinion L.A.

Rodriguez: Reform for people or for politics?

In 2006, the last time Congress took a serious look at comprehensive immigration reform, hundreds of thousands of immigrants, legal and illegal, marched through the streets of the nation's cities. The resulting media coverage was filled with stories about real people — brown people! — whose lives would be affected by the proposed legislation. It was one of those rare moments when the public could witness the intersection of grass-roots movements, insider political maneuvering and their human consequences. But that year's push for reform wound up going nowhere.

So far in the current debate over immigration reform, the immigrant story you're most likely to hear is that of the Cuban American senator from Florida, Republican Marco Rubio. The marches are gone. And so is the multiplicity of voices and faces.

There's something disembodied and disconnected about the discussion now. Other than the president's quick hop to Nevada to give his post-second-inaugural immigration speech some local color, the discussion has been conducted almost exclusively inside the Beltway and behind closed doors. Quick, what are the terms of the "bipartisan framework"?

If reform does come this year, it'll be absent any pretense that it was accomplished for the people or by the people, except very indirectly. That's because we all know that reform is advancing not because of human needs but because of political needs: Specifically, the Republicans' desperation to save their reputation with Latino voters.

If you're in favor of comprehensive reform — as I am — you couldn't care less how it happens, as long as it happens. But there's real danger that fixing immigration in an inside-the-Beltway manner may worsen an even bigger problem: the growing disconnect between the public and politics.

The way immigration is being debated is exactly why so many Americans are so cynical about the political process. Civic do-gooders are constantly telling us how important it is to engage in our public institutions, to make our voices heard. We Americans want to believe that, but then we see major national policy made with little public input, and we rightly suspect that the political class ultimately works for the greater glory of the political class. Does it even matter if we get involved?

It should. Yes, grass-roots public debates, let alone mass marches, are messy. The messaging isn't always clear or smooth. Real people don't have press secretaries or public relations consultants. Their arguing points arise from textured and nuanced real-life situations that don't lend themselves to the purist positions held by the ideological extremes, which drown out real discussion in our national dialogue. Finding lasting solutions to problems requires going into the weeds.

One reason our politics keep failing to produce nuanced solutions is that hot-button issues are raised to the level of abstraction. Take the specific applications to specific lives out of the conversation and polarization results, shades of gray disappear. Does it ever seem to you that the people who do engage in debates most fiercely on such issues as abortion or gay marriage are the very people who are least likely to be personally grappling with the issue?

One sure sign of the need for a reality check in the immigration debate is the number of politicians and policies claiming to serve the interests of a national "Latino community." That "community" — as a single entity — is a myth. All 50 million Latinos can't be reduced to a single-issue interest group.

Such reductionism allows Washington to hijack "Latinos" for its own purposes. It allows the media to entertain the absurd notion that throngs of mestizo Mexican Americans from California will one day help carry a white Cuban U.S. senator from Florida to the White House, because they're all Latino. It enables the Republican Party to think that supporting immigration reform is enough of a solution to having become a de facto white race party.

The best check on such nonsense is the public, and especially those members of the public who would be affected by the policies under construction. The people need to be engaged not only to counter Washington myth-making but to make sure that whatever reform is produced serves actual human constituents, distinct human dilemmas. Dehumanized debates, after all, too often produce dehumanizing policies.

grodriguez@latimescolumnists.com

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • GOP must act on immigration

    GOP must act on immigration

    Before President Obama headed to China this weekend, he sat down one more time with congressional leaders to discuss potential areas of legislative agreement. Not surprisingly, divisions quickly emerged with Republicans — and some of the deepest divisions had to do with immigration reform.

  • The Border Patrol shouldn't be allowed to police itself

    The Border Patrol shouldn't be allowed to police itself

    Two years ago, a scathing independent report by law enforcement experts found that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency had failed to fully investigate all 67 uses of deadly force, including 19 killings, by its agents from January 2010 through October 2012, most occurring along the southwest...

  • Immigration reform: Let the states lead the way

    Immigration reform: Let the states lead the way

    Texas and California are trying to reform legal migration on their own. The politics in these two states couldn't be more different, but legislators in both states recently proposed running their own guest-worker visa programs to get around the federal immigration reform gridlock. Relying on states...

  • Companies gaming the visa system is a cruel trick on hard-working Americans

    Companies gaming the visa system is a cruel trick on hard-working Americans

    Of all the bait-and-switch tricks, the one that both political and corporate America are pulling on American workers has to be among the meanest.

  • Immigrants in U.S. illegally should not automatically be denied bail

    Immigrants in U.S. illegally should not automatically be denied bail

    The Supreme Court today made a smart call in rejecting the appeal of an odious Arizona law trumping the established legal principle that bail for those charged with criminal offenses should be based on risk of flight and threat to the community.

  • No ICE in L.A. County jails

    No ICE in L.A. County jails

    The move by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors this week to withdraw from a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement program should resolve what had become an unwelcome blurring of the roles played by sheriff's deputies at county jails and immigration agents. But in a related decision,...

  • Hey, ICE, let the mothers with children go free

    Hey, ICE, let the mothers with children go free

    As the federal government struggled to handle the illicit flow of mothers and children, and children traveling alone, over the Mexican border last summer, it adopted several strategies, some of which made more sense (like trying to improve conditions in Central America) than others. Among the worst...

  • Could the anti-immigrant loudmouths pass a U.S. citizenship test?

    Could the anti-immigrant loudmouths pass a U.S. citizenship test?

    To listen to talk radio and cable television, which are dominated by conservatives, the national and state debates over immigration give the impression that most legal residents of the state of California oppose immigrant workers here illegally and might even be favorably disposed to Mitt Romney's...

Comments
Loading

72°