This post originally appeared on NBCLatino.

Going forward there is only one option, hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

The path to immigration reform has always been a narrow one.  But just a couple of weeks ago it seemed that a reform could shimmy its way through the Senate and squeeze its way past the House of Representatives.  Today, in the wake of the Boston bombings and the Heritage Foundation’s fear-mongering report that path to reform looks increasingly tight.

So being a cautious yet practical optimist I am bracing myself for immigration reform going down in flames.  And if this happens, the last thing we should do is keep banging our heads against the D.C. wall or just sit around strategizing for the 2014 or 2016 election.   If immigration reform fails at the federal level then the emphasis must move to our state capitals and city councils. Continue Reading →

This post originally appeared on NBCLatino.

A hardwired instinct is to turn inwards in times of crisis.  In the case of the recent Boston bombings, we see our natural emotional reactions at work – Americans are fearful, Americans are turning inward, and Americans are seeking to keep strangers out.

Put it all together and immigration reform looks more and more difficult.

Immigrants are no strangers to being the scapegoats of the visceral reactions that come in times of crisis.  The last 100 years has seen several instances of Americans turning inward and not only shunning but scapegoating immigrants.  To begin, there was the internment of German and Japanese immigrants during the World Wars.  Then, during the Great Depression there were the round ups and mass deportations of Mexican immigrants and citizens.  And most recently there is the racial profiling and harassment Arab-Americans have been subject to.

So in the current political context, it is perfectly normal to see why there are rumblings to seal up the borders and halt immigration.  But while the response to turn away from the immigrant may be a natural response it’s not a rational response.  The most rational response to the domestic terror attack is to push forward immigration reform—policy that makes us safer by better tracking those immigrants who are here and who are seeking to enter.

But the problem is that this type of big picture or reasoned thinking takes time to kick in.  In the wake of a crisis, emotions are in the driver’s seat.  Rational and level-headed thinking lags a bit behind the visceral.

Herein lies the rub.  In order for the rational part of our thinking to kick in we need time.  With regards to the immigration discussion, time would allow folks to see that not going through with an immigration reform makes us less safe.  However, too much time is a thief of momentum.  And immigration reform, as any type of complex legislation, lives and dies on momentum. Continue Reading →

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This post originally appeared on NBCLatino.

For over a decade, the prospect of a comprehensive immigration reform has existed.  It has waxed, waned, lingered, and flat-out stalled over the years, but it seems that finally reform will become a reality in the wake of the Gang of Eight’s bi-partisan proposal.

But what happens afterwards?  What does a post reform political landscape look like?

The scenarios can be boiled down to three – the good, the bad, and the ugly.

First, the good–immigration disappears as a political wedge issue.

All of the components of the reform bill work as intended and we see millions of undocumented immigrants gain citizenship within a context of efficient border security and a legal immigration system seamlessly shift toward a work-based system.

Within this first scenario, immigrants, primarily Latino immigrants, are folded into America’s political system.  For example, how European immigrants assimilated into the American political system over the course of the 20^th Century.  If all goes as planned, close to ten million new voters, previously undocumented immigrants, could enter the political landscape by 2017.  Those who had been living in the shadows would not only be able to emerge from the shadows, but do so with a political voice and vote.

And the incorporation of Latinos into the political landscape does not necessarily have to be politically one-sided.  If Republicans continue to support immigration reform and if the GOP draws away from the right and moves toward the center, then some of these new immigrants may be amenable to calling the GOP home.

Next, comes the bad—immigrants live in a legalization limbo. Continue Reading →

This post originally appeared on NBCLatino.

Pie is part of our political speak–“as American as apple pie” or getting “a piece of the pie.”  But talk of pie is particularly useful when it comes to immigration.  Simply put, reform boils down to how you cut up the current immigration pie or if you make a bigger one.

In the last fifty years, the immigration pie has expanded.  In other words, we haven’t had to cut some folks a smaller slice in order to give others a bigger one.  At the main immigration policy junctures of 1965, 1986 and 1990, the United States has refrained from skimping on slices.  Family reunification visas and worker visas have not come at the expense of the other.  However, we are on the verge of a paradigm shift where the pie may have gotten as big as it’s going to get and the family slice may get cut into.

First, a little background on family reunification visas.  Family considerations in immigration policy have been around since immigration was first regulated in the late 1800s.  But it wasn’t until 1965 with the Hart-Cellar Act that family reunification became the centerpiece of America’s immigration policy.

The Hart Cellar Act established two classes of family visas.  The first family visa category is for the unmarried minor children or the parents of U.S. citizens.  This visa category has no cap.  The second family visa category includes adult children, brothers and sisters, and the spouses or unmarried children of green card holders.  Each of these specific family preferences has a cap attached to it.

The current round of immigration talks has revolved around the other main visa type, worker visas.  There has been a great deal of discussion of visas for individuals in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematical (STEM) fields. There has been similar attention to the need for immigrant workers at the opposite end of the skill spectrum.  Beyond agricultural workers, the U.S. finds itself in need of a wide array of low-skilled employees.  For example, with the aging of the Baby Boomers the home health care industry is growing beyond the current supply of workers.

Both parties agree on the need for these new worker visas.  Republican and Democratic Senators have already agreed to create a new visa class, the W Visa, for low-skilled workers.  Senators from both parties have also signaled that they plan to expand the cap of the H1-B Visas for people from high-tech fields.

The Democratic and Republican Parties agree on the end—more visas for workers.  However, they differ on how to get there.  Today, the majority of immigrant visas go to family members of immigrants through the family reunification preference.  Republican lawmakers instead want to see the bulk of visas go to workers.  They want to increase the W or H1-B visas by decreasing the family visas.  In turn, Democratic lawmakers want to leave the family reunification visas in place but at the same time increase the number of work-based visas.

In very non-technical terms, Republicans lean toward re-slicing the current pie, while Democrats want to bake a new, bigger pie. Continue Reading →