At some point during his first term in office, every US President promises comprehensive immigration reform.

None has ever delivered. This week it was Barack Obama’s turn to swear that something will be done, in a speech trailed by aides as a significant statement of intent but completely lacking in specific policy proposals.

Meanwhile, frustrated by decades of federal inaction, states, cities and small towns are taking matters into their own hands, passing ordinances to stem the influx of migrants from Latin America. Arizona’s notorious instruction for police to stop vehicles they think may be carrying illegal immigrants has inspired copycat laws across the country, but many new statutes go further, fuelling expectation on both sides of the debate that the government will be forced to declare its hand.

“The president’s view is that there’s been a lot in the news about immigration lately,” deputy press secretary Bill Burton announced. “There’s been the Arizona law, there’s been protests about it. He thought this was a good time to talk plainly with the American people about his views on immigration.”

Of course, this being the most toxic subject in politics, Obama’s address was anything but plainspoken. It contained the usual platitudes about “a nation of immigrants” but little substance. “Being an American is not a matter of blood or birth,” he said. “It’s a matter of faith.”

Right-wing columnist Michelle Malkin wrote that talk of comprehensive immigration reform is “second only to ‘hope and change’ as the most vapid, emptiest rhetorical construction in Washington”. If such skepticism was to be expected from the author of Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, And Other Foreign Menaces To Our Shores, it is shared by more Americans than liberals care to admit. Polls consistently show that most voters favor tougher immigration laws.

In late May, a CNN survey found that 60% of Americans want the government to focus on deportations and increased border security, rather than creating a path to citizenship for immigrants. In the same poll, only a third were opposed to the Arizona measure, despite concerns about racial profiling.

Local government taking the initiative is nothing new, but it has never been so widespread. Hazleton, in Pennsylvania, and Farmer’s Branch, in Texas, tried to introduce legislation discriminating against illegal immigrants in 2006. Both are mired in long-running court cases against the American Civil Liberties Union. Undeterred, states and municipalities all over the USA are following their lead.

In Fremont, Nebraska, the city council voted to ban landlords from renting to illegal immigrants. Tenants will be required to supply proof of citizenship to police. Businesses must use a federal database of social security numbers before hiring new employees.

Announcing plans to sue, the ACLU’s regional director Laurel Marsh said that “not only do local ordinances such as this violate federal law, they are also completely out of step with American values of fairness and equality”. This may be so, but it is harder to argue that they are out of touch with public opinion.

Even Massachusetts, traditionally a socially liberal state, has instituted a crackdown on illegal immigrants using public services. A proposal requiring the Attorney General to set up a hotline for people to anonymously report their neighbors was narrowly defeated. The small town of Jackson, in upstate New York, voted to make English the town’s official language, even though it has barely any Hispanic residents.

Barring a successful legal challenge – at least five lawsuits have been launched – Arizona’s new law will take effect on July 29. Obama did not say whether the Justice Department will seek to prevent it, although administration officials have been dropping hints. The only unequivocal line came from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, on a trip to Ecuador, where she told a television news crew that “the justice department, under [President Obama's] direction, will be bringing a lawsuit against the act.”

This would be a politically risky move, with the mid-term elections coming up in November. Obama has been playing both sides: sending 1200 additional troops to patrol the border but instructing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement unit to focus on criminals, rather than people with family members in the USA.

Republicans are tacking hard to the right, none more so than John McCain, who worked with Ted Kennedy to draw up an immigration reform bill under George Bush. Facing a primary challenge from hardline conservative JD Hayworth, McCain now says the government’s priority should be to “complete the danged fence”.

As always, both parties must weigh up the immediate political gain of talking tough against the severe long-term risk of alienating Hispanic voters – the fastest growing section of the electorate. Despite Obama’s professed urgency, it is inconceivable that reform will be put to a vote before the elections.

Source: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/world-news/obama-finally-talks-immigration-but-the-country-is-already-taking-action-1.1039058