Immigration: a Democratic perspective

After a fleeting appearance on the national radar screen in the mid-1980s, immigration seems poised to be the political hot burton issue of the 1990s. The polling data indicates that immigration has the potential to generate similar fervor as did abortion in the '80s and busing in the early '70s.

Some of the fundings from recent surveys on immigration are remarkable:

* A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll finds that two-thirds of American voters claim that the low-cost labor provided by immigrants mostly hurts the economy, while a 56 percent majority believe immigrants constitute a drain on taxpayers by using government services;

* In the vote-rich state of California (which has seen the most serious debate on immigration thus far), a Charlton Research Company survey found that four in five (79 percent) Californians characterize the problem of illegal immigration as "very serious." Moreover, the short-term trends (shaky confidence in the economy and scarce government resources) make it more, rather than less, likely that the immigration issue will rise in salience.

The obvious conundrum facing Democrats is the need to reconcile their party's strong tradition of support for minorities and civil liberties with the public outcry for strong action on immigration. While there is no question that the Democratic Party should not compromise the former, Democrats, on the other hand, cannot afford to ignore the latter.

To forego any voice in this debate and to allow the extreme Right to dictate the agenda is to risk the adoption of policies that could spur a hacklash against legal immigrants, or even worse. Indeed, leaving the issue of immigration in the hands of right-wing GOPers like Pat Buchanan is akin to using a hammer to crack an egg.

Admittedly, public attitudes on specific approaches to the immigration problem tend to be ill-formed, mainly because there has been little sustained national attention on the issue. But in studying the polling data and the political environment, several observations emerge:

First and foremost, anti-immigration sentiment is broadbased. It would be a mistake to believe that the uproar over immigration is confined to a narrow sector of the population. For example, an overwhelming 71 percent of respondents in a December NBC/Wall Street Journal survey believed that immigration should be cut back. Strong majorities of such groups as Democrats (70 percent), blacks (68 percent), Hispanics (68 percent), and liberals (62 percent) took this view.

Additionally, our own polling has shown that support for proposals dealing with the immigration problem (such as stopping welfare and medical benefits to illegal immigrants) receive support across the political, ideological, and racial spectrum. In short, immigration is a mainstream issue of American life, which makes it so important.

Second, tough policies to control the flow of illegal immigration are a solid first step to showing responsible leadership. In large measure, the current debate is a reaction to the mounting costs of illegal immigration to society. For example, nearly nine out of ten (88 percent) Californians claim that illegal immigration is a major burden on the state's economy and budget.

Not surprisingly, a Californian (and a progressive Democrat -- Senator Dianne Feinstein -- has devised one of the most comprehensive plans so far to deal with the problem of immigration, with most of her proposals relating to clamping down on illegal immigration, such as beefing up the Border Patrol with a one dollar toll for crossing the U.S. border and increasing penalties on immigrant smugglers.

In addition to dealing with the "supply" side of the illegal immigration problem, as Senator Feinstein has done, politicians should work to clamp down on the "demand" side, as well. Strict sanctions against businesses that knowingly hire illegal immigrants bear serious study.

The American public is concerned, even angry, about immigration, and they want the government to do something. The issue is problematical to Democrats if the solutions affect the rights of illegal immigrants already in the United States, such as cutting off welfare and medical benefits to illegal immigrants, or passing a constitutional amendment to prevent children of illegal immigrants from becoming U.S. citizens. Cracking down on the flow of illegal immigration into this country, as Senator Feinstein and others have proposed, seems to be a good middle ground response. The worst would be to ignore the immigration issue and risk a backlash against legal immigrants.

There is no doubt that this is a difficult issue for Democrats to deal with, and must be approached with a maximum of sensitivity and a minimum of demagoguery. But this is an issue that the Democratic Party should not pass on, and risk allowing conservative Republicans to become the accepted voice for immigration policy in the 1990s.

Fred Yang is vice president of Garin-Hart Strategic Research Group, a Washington, D.C.-based Democratic, polling firm.

COPYRIGHT 1993 Campaigns & Elections, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group