Immigration reform has such a loaded and diverse definition among political parties. Does the US fix the problems that continually pester the US and drive up the population of undocumenteds or does the US claim a portion of the latest round of undocumenteds that enter the US by making them US citizens? The dems primarily want the latter. The GOPs primarily want the former. Why not present a bill that puts forward all points of viewCertainly, being an advocate of the former has a better chance of maintaining the population of undocumenteds and maintaining the costs to governments for, for example, education and health care associated with legalizing undocumenteds. One could also admit the cost of border patrol (gates, paper work,etc.) associated with maintaining and controlling undocumented populations could be enormous.
Seems real simple why BO (the prez) is instituting an executive action on 'Immigration Reform', now, even though he waited (patiently?) for congress to come up with Immigration Reform: the next congress will be heavily influenced by GOPs. It's less likely a GOP-controlled congress will present a bill on Immigration Reform that is acceptable to BO. Politically, BO can't be seen as a roadblock to 'Immigration Reform' WHEN he vetoes Immigration Reform bills that are heavily influenced by an GOP-controlled congress. Is it a forgone conclusion that a GOP-controlled congress will not allow compromises and influences from minority parties, BO? Maybe this is the ultimate lesson BO and the dems (and maybe the GOPS, too) need to learn: allow divergent voices and influences when bills are discussed and prepared when your party has majorities in congress. Why not present an Immigration Bill that attempts to, at least, compromise and attempts to put forward all points of view? I know compromise isn't the atmosphere of today's American politics. That needs to change, too.