What the immigration reform bill still needs

The eight senators who crafted an immigration reform bill deserve praise for finding a bipartisan compromise. But the bill needs a theme other than economics and security to help place immigration's role in defining the nation's identity.

|
Reuters
An immigrant holds an American flag during a naturalization ceremony to become a US citizen in New York April 17.

Just as people often define themselves by the company they keep, a nation creates an identity by the immigrants it lets in. For that reason alone, it is instructive to look over the 844-page bill on immigration reform released Tuesday by a “gang” of eight senators.

The bipartisan bill, which the Senate will debate in coming weeks, seems more like tactical truces between the two parties than a vision on how to define American society through its immigrant flows. It contains difficult compromises designed to split political differences, all in hopes of pleasing – or at least not offending – the various constituencies of Democratic and Republican lawmakers.

The bill’s title – the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” – illustrates a general lack of grand ideals. Yes, better security and individual prosperity do matter. Yes, the United States needs both low- and high-skilled workers from abroad. And surely, the mass lawbreaking of undocumented workers needs a rectifying and humane resolution.

But shouldn’t a major move to legalize 11 million immigrants and open the doors to millions more at least offer a transcending mission that unifies the nation around its civic character?

At best, the document calls for a “just system for integrating those who seek to join American society.” But join for what?

In a 2011 speech, President Obama warned of the need to lift the immigration debate to a higher narrative:

“The truth is, we’ve often wrestled with the politics of who is and who isn’t allowed to enter this country,” he said. “These issues touch on deeply held convictions – about who we are as a people, about what it means to be an American.”

Past immigration laws were designed to help break down the potentially divisive identities of class, sect, and ethnicity and create a unifying theme. The theme was often based on ideals spelled out in the Declaration of Independence and other founding documents. But after many waves of immigrants, the US is seen less as a “melting pot” or even a “salad.” Some might describe it as a table of distinct tapas dishes.

If the bill passes, will American society become a “pudding without a theme,” to use a Churchill phrase? Modern countries that allow new immigrants need an identity centered on ideals – “bonds of affection,” as Lincoln put it – that are worthy of self-sacrifice. And certainly worth more than an economic imperative, a security patch, or a wider tolerance for diversity.

The nation’s motto, E pluribus unum (out of many, one), constantly needs to define that “one.” That happens in many ways – through elections, court decisions, and cultural trends. A new immigration law should be able to strike broadly at reshaping a national identity.

In designing the Great Seal of the United States, Founding Father Charles Thomson chose the words Novus ordo seclorum, or new order of the ages. But he insisted that it should really signify the “beginning of the new American Era.” Surely a new and hefty immigration bill can signify a new era for America that defines what sort of new company it wants to keep.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to What the immigration reform bill still needs
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2013/0417/What-the-immigration-reform-bill-still-needs
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe