Running for Office, Running From the Borde

Nathan Rodriguez, nrodriguez@vailtrail.com
July 2, 2008

Last week, presidential frontrunners John McCain and Barack Obama made headlines with their attempts to court Hispanic voters. But unlike other issues on which the two make sharp policy distinctions, when it comes to immigration, it appears they share more in common than not.

Political analysts agree the Hispanic vote may be the key to carrying swing states like Colorado in November. The question then, is whether the differences between McCain and Obama’s immigration policies will be enough to sway the bulk of this crucial voting bloc.

Plenty of Similarities

In 2006, McCain introduced a bipartisan bill with Sen. Edward Kennedy to reform immigration policy. Obama favored the legislation while conservatives derided the proposal for “granting amnesty.” Two years later, in the heat of the campaign, McCain has shifted his stance, recently saying he would not support the measure.

McCain now frames the issue as border security first, immigration policy reform second. He faces a challenging tightrope walk of appeasing the substantial Hispanic vote without betraying his conservative base. Obama frames the immigration issue as one that has been exploited by politicians, and one that demands comprehensive reform.

The main talking points begin to blend together: both candidates agree on the need for reform, both agree on the importance of border security, and both prefer a moderate approach to deal with illegal immigrants currently living in the U.S.

Differences and the DREAM Act

There are a few differences worth noting. The most detailed analysis of the two candidates on immigration comes from Maribel Hastings of La Opinion newspaper. He finds two distinctions: Obama supports the DREAM Act, while McCain does not; Obama supports giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants and McCain does not.

The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act), is designed to benefit high school students who are long-term illegal immigrants, allowing them to serve in the armed forces, attend college, or gain legal status provided they meet basic requirements. According to the Immigrant Policy Project, an estimated 65,000 students would be eligible for the DREAM Act annually.

The other point of contention concerns driver’s licenses. Here, Obama takes the road less traveled, supporting measures to provide illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses. This bold move may delight many Hispanic voters, but is so far to the left that it risks alienating “mainstream” voters if he makes it a priority in the campaign. Notably, Obama’s stance on issuing driver’s licenses is omitted from the immigration policy overview on his official Web site.

The local view

Nationally, both Hispanic groups and coalitions opposed to illegal immigration seem uninspired by Obama and McCain’s positions on the issue.

“Both McCain and Obama have been good on immigration, so it kind of neutralizes that issue,” said Brent Wilkes, executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). “I think Obama has an edge with the Hispanic vote primarily for the same reasons he has an edge with the rest of the electorate. Latinos are concerned about the economy and the war in Iraq.”

Ardent opponents of illegal immigration are less than pleased that McCain won the G.O.P. nomination. A nationwide Bloomberg poll conducted during the primaries showed McCain won just 1 percent of voters for whom illegal immigration was the “top concern.” It appears this sentiment remains valid locally.

Colorado representative and former Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo wrote an open letter to McCain in late June, questioning the consistency of his immigration policy. Tancredo mentioned McCain’s recent closed-door meeting with Hispanic leaders in Chicago in which he reportedly promised to pursue comprehensive immigration reform. Tancredo pressed: “Given your past sponsorship of amnesty legislation, such statements raise troubling questions. Are you planning to break a promise you made … to postpone other immigration reform legislation until we have first secured our borders?”

Debbie Marquez, an Edwards resident on the Democratic National Committee, doesn’t anticipate McCain ratcheting up the rhetoric on immigration anytime soon. “Republicans have used [immigration] as a wedge issue in the past and they’d like to do it again,” said Marquez, “But it ain’t gonna happen.” She cited anemic fundraising as one cause. “Right now the Republican 527s and ‘Swiftboat-type’ groups aren’t able to raise the money, and I think the country is just tired of it.”

Two Colorado coalitions opposed to illegal immigration also are dissatisfied with their options in November. Fred Elbel of Defend Colorado Now, wrote via e-mail, “McCain has [a] track record that is demonstrably open borders, and Obama had a D- grade on immigration.” Stanley Weekes, state director of The Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform (CAIR), noted that his group focuses on local immigration concerns, but responded via e-mail, “It appears the primary candidates for the presidency are clueless to the desires of the majority of citizens and are pandering to a very narrow slice of enablers.”

Battleground issue or not?

This begs the question: If special interest groups aren’t gearing up for an election battle, will immigration policy be a deciding factor for mainstream voters?

It appears not.

A 2007 Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll shows that a solid 60 percent of voters nationwide are ambivalent when it comes to immigration reform. The Dallas Morning News suggests the remaining 40 percent of voters are split on either side of the debate, with an “unvarying 20 to 25 percent” of voters being “bitterly anti-immigrant” and “dominat[ing] the debate,” while an estimated 15 to 20 percent of voters are “sympathetic to immigrants,” but are “neither vocal nor intense.”

As it stands, the G.O.P. faces an uphill battle to woo Hispanic voters. In 2006, the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center estimated that 49 percent of Hispanic voters went Democrat while only 28 percent voted Republican. In 2007, the same study showed the margin increasing as 57 percent of registered Hispanic voters went Democrat, while 23 percent leaned Republican. Finally, when asked to choose between McCain and Obama, a Wall Street Journal poll from June 2008 shows Obama enjoying a 62- to 28-percent lead over McCain among Hispanics.

In short, Hispanic voters have moved en masse to the Democratic Party over the last few years. It has reached a point where it makes little political sense for either candidate to force the issue.

It appears immigration will remain on the back burner for the November election. While the subject will generate some talk on the campaign trail, a return to the polarizing rhetoric of the past is highly unlikely. McCain would rather not bring it up, as members of his own party have accused him of “flip-flopping” and “zig-zagging” on the issue. At the same time, Obama’s risky strategy of favoring driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants risks splintering his broader coalition.

Without special interest groups nipping at their heels, neither McCain nor Obama seem anxious to roll the dice on immigration reform. It is more likely each candidate will advance an appeasement strategy, and continue speaking in general terms about the need for immigration reform without straying too far from the middle.