In a bitterly divided Washington, there seems to be a real bipartisan push toward substantive immigration reform. Even Republican stalwart Sean Hannity declared himself “evolved” on the issue, and is now in favor of such a pathway. Some House Republicans still seem reluctant, and there are been proposals that offer to provide illegal immigrants with residency instead of full citizenship.
Many have decried this Republican shift as cynical or opportunistic. Even Hannity admits that “demographics” are at the heart of his evolution on immigration. Data indicates that in 2012 71.6% of the electorate was white, but this percentage will decrease to 63.7% by 2030. Latinos will account for 40% of the increase in the overall size of the electoral, making them the fastest growing group.
Let me be the first to applaud cynicism. Isn’t this what a representative democracy is all about: politicians acting in their own interest and hoping some good will result? It’s appealing to think of the model politician as a benevolent trustee of the public good, being guided by an unerring moral compass and an enlightened view of history. But this is fantasy.
The genius of capitalism is that it allows everyone to care mostly about themselves, while creating a stable system that benefits many. Representative democracy forces politicians to do what’s in their best interests to get elected, which means paying attention to voters.
Looking at history, it’s clear that voting is an imperfect system of accountability. African American men were granted the right to vote in 1870, although not until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was this right defended from infringement by the states. And yet, despite the election of a black president, there are only two African American senators, and disturbing facts such as the black-white educational achievement gap make us realize that equality of rights does not mean equality of opportunity.
But we’re at a point where African American voters can’t be ignored on Election Day, and politicians are finding that Latino voters can’t be ignored either. This is unquestionably a good thing. And if there’s a silver lining in today’s media fragmentation, it’s that new media has allowed numerous interest groups and constituencies to have their voices heard more easily.
There’s a term in political science called “issue uptake,” which is when a politician adopts an issue used by her challenger in order to negate that issue during the next election. Democrats, especially President Obama, have done this effectively with national security. By embracing much of the Republican national security agenda, President Obama refuted years of stereotypes about weak liberals and took foreign policy out of the debate during the last election. There is no reason Republicans can’t do something similar with immigration.
We’ll see if talk about immigration reform becomes an actual bill that lands on the president’s desk. It was only a few months ago that the Republican platform, as expressed through Mitt Romney, was to create immigration laws so strenuous that illegal immigrants would “self-deport.” There will be temptation on the part of Republicans to blame the messenger and not reevaluate the message. Even Hannity couldn’t help but offer the suggestion that maybe a different “presentation” or “tone” could help Republicans do better with Latinos. But to be fair to Hannity, he has changed his views. And even if those new views are the result of craven political calculations, let’s use that to create better public policy.