Via Mark Matson in QH, a theory from David Bernstein on the politics of immigration reform:
Which brings me to my theory. I believe that Rahm Emanuel and Chuck Schumer have been planning to introduce an immigration-reform bill in 2010, not because they think it can be passed -- I think Drum is right, it has virtually no chance -- but because it will raise the issue back up to the big, national conservative marketplace.
You see, one of the biggest problems facing Democrats this year is that Hispanics don't vote in mid-term elections. That doesn't make a huge difference in most swing House districts (in fact, the issue hurts in more districts than it helps) -- but it could make a huge difference in quite a few US Senate races (Cal., Fla., Tex., Col., etc.), Governor races (Cal., Fla., Ariz., NM, NY, etc.), and (duh-duh-duuummm...) control over state legislatures heading into redistricting.
How do you get Hispanics to vote? You fill the TV with images of hateful conservatives screaming for mass deportation, that's how. You think Rahm didn't notice the effect in 2006?
On the one hand, there may be that benefit, as Mark opines, given the relative motivation on each side, particularly in what is likely to be a Republican year and how the Republican base feels about this issue. In addition, there's the December 2009 polling demonstrating immigration reform is a motivating factor for Hispanic voters:
A newly released poll of 1,010 Latino voters in twelve key states by Bendixen & Amandi reveals how Latino voters view the two major political parties on the issue, and how this perception impacts their vote. Among the findings:
* Immigration is a key issue for the Latino electorate. While more respondents chose issues such as the economy and health care than immigration as their number one priority, 78% said the immigration issue is important to them and their family, including 51% who called it "very important." The issue is particularly salient among the 55% of respondents who were foreign-born; 84% of foreign-born voters called the immigration issue "important," with 64% labeling it "very important."
* The vast majority of Latino voters support comprehensive immigration reform. By a 77%-11% margin, respondents favored an immigration plan that would legalize undocumented workers over one that would force most of the undocumented population to leave the country.
* Immigration reform is a personal issue to Latinos. Sixty-two percent of respondents reported having an undocumented friend, family member, neighbor, or co-worker. For these respondents, immigration reform is not an abstract concept discussed on the nightly news, but a personal matter that requires a fair and humane solution.
[...]
* Latinos are poised to make a difference in November. While this survey was conducted a year before the next election, and a lot can change in that time frame, 73% of respondents said they were very likely to vote in November 2010, and 20% said they were somewhat likely. Fully 65% said they were more likely to support generic Democratic candidates for the U.S. House and U.S. Senate, while 20% said they would vote Republican and 15% were undecided. However, 72% of Latino voters said they would not even consider voting for a candidate whose stance on immigration reform was to try and deport most undocumented immigrants.
Of course, you could say the same thing about many blocs on almost any issue- fill TV screens with Virginia Foxx and John Cornyn screaming about "special rights for homosexuals" and "men in women's bathrooms" on ENDA to turn out LGBT voters, for example. If this were true, then absent considerations about the legislative calendar and members not wanting to take certain votes, you'd hold votes on lots of things just for the inflammatory effect.
The other thing this whole discussion reminds me of is the discussion around holding a vote in the New York State Senate on marriage equality even if you knew it would fail by a large margin, 24-38. Since many members refused to state a position on the issue, having a vote gave advocates a target list to work with (Fight Back NY is one group that is already on the ground) and, in the aftermath, it certainly emboldened LGBT activists across the state.
Whether or not the same can be applied on immigration reform remains to be seen, but I wouldn't put it past someone at the White House seeing the politics of it, and it raises questions around the value of having issue fights for the sake of voter motivation, at least in part.
|
