Did you catch the debates last night?

I did.One of the big gun Latino Media Reporters was invited to ask the candidates about Latino issues. What did he ask about in the few minutes he had? Immigration…only. Yes it is that important for Latinos. He asked about what the candidates plan to do when the border is secured. The Candidates deflected the question by first insisting that the border is not secured. When pressed the candidates gave a list of what “secure the border means.” Interestingly, pretty much all of the items on the list are already in place-of course if anyone points it out, they will say that the items have to be full-proof in order to be checked off the list.
But what IF they are ever convinced that the border is secured?
One yearned for the time back in the 50’s when we hada working system that included bars for diseases and crimes and did not give public benefits to immigrants. I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt that he doesn’t mean 1951 when we had quotas and restricted citizenship by race. But if he meant the 1952 act then that’s the system today- didn’t work then for Latinos and it doesn’t work now. I know that we often like to yearn for the “good all days,” but as several immigration academics including even me point out, the reality is that our immigration system never matched reality and looking back at the past through rose-colored glasses does no one any favors.
But what worried me the most was that many of them were more interested in restricting access to human rights than reform. The use of basic services such as education were considered as creating a “public burden” on society. Some blured the line between authorized, unauthoried immigrants, and even citizen children of immigrants.-hinting that the fight over Plyer, birthright citizenship, and immigrant pedigree rmain alive and well? Perhapst testing the water on how far they can go with the base?
None of the candidates said they wanted to end all immigration. Some didn’t indicate what they would do after securing the border, but for now none said that immigration should end. So clearly for now it is political suicide to state a desire to end migrations. However others are testing the waters for them and planting seeds against all migration, the way they successfully planted seeds against unauthorized migration, and currently the children of unauthorized immigrants.
The commercial about ending all immigration period (welcome to the new era of political advertisement) used the power of fear and self preservation to its fullest. While the reality is otherwise and immigrants create more jobs than they take (can you say google? PEW Hispanic?), the commercial pushed the argument to a new level-from accepting some select immigrants to turning them all away.
Lines are moving. We may be seeing the start of a new phase in US migration politics. Scary to think that one of these days we may hear a viable politician include the termination of immigration on his platform, but may it just be possible? EQ