Immigration Reform in the National Interest: The Jordan Commission vs. the "Gang of Eight"

By Stanley Renshon and Stanley Renshon on April 19, 2013

In 1990 Congress authorized a bipartisan Commission on Immigration Reform, chaired by then-Rep. Barbara Jordan (D-Texas), hereafter the Jordan Commission. The Commission was mandated "to review and evaluate the implementation and impact of U.S. immigration policy and to transmit to the Congress reports of its findings and recommendations."

In the introduction to the Commission's first of four major reports to Congress, Rep. Jordan wrote: "[I]t is both a right and a responsibility of a democratic society to manage immigration so that it serves the national interest."

Those basic, simple, but profoundly important words were given policy weight and legitimacy by the vast efforts undertaken by the Commission to educate itself and the public on the complex, interrelated issues that are ingrained in American immigration policy.

We now have a bill written by eight U.S. senators that presents itself as having provided solutions, albeit not perfect ones, to the complex and wide ranging set of American immigration policies.

Compared to the rather brief, plain-spoken opening statement of the Jordan Commission's recommendations, the "Gang of Eight's" legislation begins with a set of grand, stirring affirmations of principles. They read:

SEC. 2. STATEMENT OF CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The passage of this Act recognizes that the primary tenets of its success depend on securing the sovereignty of the United States of America and establishing a coherent and just system for integrating those who seek to join American society.

We have a right, and duty, to maintain and secure our borders, and to keep our country safe and prosperous. As a nation founded, built and sustained by immigrants we also have a responsibility to harness the power of that tradition in a balanced way that secures a more prosperous future for America. We have always welcomed newcomers to the United States and will continue to do so. But in order to qualify for the honor and privilege of eventual citizenship, our laws must be followed. The world depends on America to be strong — economically, militarily and ethically. The establishment of a stable, just and efficient immigration system only supports those goals. As a nation, we have the right and responsibility to make our borders safe, to establish clear and just rules for seeking citizenship, to control the flow of legal immigration, and to eliminate illegal immigration, which in some cases has become a threat to our national security. All parts of this Act are premised on the right and need of the United States to achieve these goals, and to protect its borders and maintain its sovereignty.


These magisterial "Congressional Findings" appear carefully crafted to convey the impression that this small group of senators are both aware of, and sympathize with, all the major concerns of every "major stakeholder" in the immigration debate.

It is tempting to dismiss such lofty language as hokey, hoary, or the linguistic equivalent of pabulum, sentiments with which no one could reasonably disagree. On the other hand, they do express — at the stratospheric level of understanding, basic ideals of the guiding principles around which actual immigration policy might be organized.

The question before the American people is whether the legislative substance of what the "Gang of Eight" has presented lives up to its loftily stated ideals.

Next: Immigration Ideals and Grand Bargains