EJ Dionne Almost Got It Right

Earlier this week columnist EJ Dionne penned an op-ed for the Washington Post on fixing our broken immigration system.  EJ closed his editorial with some very good advice.

The success of immigration reformers will ultimately depend on winning over those in the ambivalent middle and not treating them as xenophobes or racists.

The core argument for reform must be that the presence of so many illegal migrants without any enforceable rights undermines the rights of everyone else. The real message that a path to citizenship will send is that all long-term residents of our country should be able to assume their responsibilities as Americans.

Moving us in that direction is not about doing favors for illegal immigrants. It's about strengthening the American community. Obama needs to use the time he is buying himself to make that case.

I couldn't agree more with him on this point.  Supporters of Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) need to change the way that skeptics regard the debate on immigration.  Although they are a small minority in this country, opponents of CIR are very skilled at making a lot of noise and getting their point across.  However, the problem that I have with this editorial is not the ending, but rather the beginning.  In this editorial EJ claims:

On many questions, President Obama's approach is full speed ahead. On immigration reform, he prefers to take things one step at a time. There really is no alternative.

Immigration is politically vexing because it splits both parties and scrambles the usual ideological alignments. There is no clear majority on this issue. Roughly a third of Americans strongly favor granting illegal immigrants a way to become citizens, while another third is strongly opposed. An ambivalent middle knows the status quo is unsustainable and wants a comprehensive solution, yet is also upset about the government's failure to stop illegal immigration.

EJ by your own math here - that final third supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform too - an overwhelming majority support CIR, and there is in fact a clear majority in America willing to embrace this kind of immigration reform.  Drilling down further, we believe virtually all Americans are upset at the system itself, which is why they want action taken on it this year.  That distinction - that they are angry at government - doesn't really make a lot of sense either, nor is it enough to divide the electorate.   The idea that there is this third group which somehow holds a different position than the first just doesn't follow from your own analysis here.  The numbers you cite - that somewhere between 60 and 70 percent national support of CIR - has proven true in poll after poll taken over the last 3 1/2 years. NDN and various other groups have documented these very consistent findings - a clear majority of Americans support CIR, and that this issue is not as "vexing" as some would have you believe. 

On the contrary, CIR has brought together a wide array of interests from business to labor, conservatives, liberals, civil rights groups, clergy, law enforcement, and others to push for CIR. EJ I am glad you are lending your voice and credibility to this debate, but I felt compelled to correct this one small but important misunderstanding.