"Democrats point the finger at Obama's chief of staff for immigration reform's poor progress"

[pampango]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigration-20100521,0,1430441.story

"Rahm Emanuel, who in the past referred to the issue as the 'third rail of American politics,', has argued privately that it's a bad time for Democrats to push an immigration bill, a potential land mine in the midst of a crucial midterm election year.

"There's always a sense that no matter how hard we work, to get through the White House, we have to get through Rahm," said U.S. Rep. Raul M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.). "I would like immigration not to be part of the chief of staff's portfolio. It would make our ability to convince and access decision-makers in the White House a lot easier."

Now, as Obama's top aide, Emanuel has argued much the same thing in private meetings. He has warned that pressing ahead with an immigration bill could jeopardize the chances of moderate and conservative Democratic candidates in the run-up to the midterms, according to people familiar with the matter. A practiced nose-counter, Emanuel has also questioned whether there are enough Republican votes to help pass a bill that, among other things, would provide a path to legal status for the 11 million immigrants living here illegally."

"It's going to be much easier for this issue to move after Rahm Emanuel leaves the White House," said Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democratic Network, a think tank. "Rahm has a long history of a lack of sympathy for the importance of the immigration issue."

[Cant trust em]

1. While I think that Rahm is bad for us in many reasons, this is not the time for immig. reform.

I'm happy that the White House chose to focus on health care and financial regulation this year. I probably would have reversed the order in timing, but there you have it.

Immigration should be handled after the primary certainly, and possibly in the 2nd term.

[IndianaJoe]

2. Well, maybe he's right about the mid-terms.

But, then again, are we going to be in a position to pass something meaningful after the mid-terms? I'm wondering when there is ever going to be a "good" time to address immigration reform from a political standpoint. I'm beginning to think that a moral standpoint should be main concern.

The proposed "bipartisan" reform bill, which was put together to mollify Lindsey Graham (who is now backing away from it a-la Chuck Grassle), is top-heavy with "border closure" provisions and makes any reforms affecting reforms intended for people already here subject to meeting unspecified border-sealing "benchmarks". The "reform" that does kick in when these "benchmarks" are supposedly met is a looooooooooooooooooong path to legal status that basically tracks the old McCain package from eons ago. We can do a lot better than this.

Obama needs to remember the staunch support that he got from Latinos in the last election. Dems will make a big mistake if nothing of substance gets done for them.

[mmonk]

3. Rahm is ignoring a significant voting population

that is growing for the Democrats this time around while trying to capture conservative votes.