The past few weeks has seen considerable attention to the issue of immigration reform, although much of it from a political angle. The emphasis has tended to be on the risks/gains to the Republican party if they cooperate with the Democrats on immigration reform. The primary risk of cooperation seems to be alienating the very conservative (tea-party) constituents who are against most of the immigration proposals, while the risk of scuttling any reform seems to be consigning the “Latino vote” to the Democratic Party forever more. Esther Cepeda, writing in the Washington Post, highlights the problems inherent in a political calculus of immigration reform that depends on unexamined assumptions of attitudes and voting patterns of Latinos. She highlights the variability in Latino attitudes, noting that less than 60% of Latinos believe that undocumented residents should be given a path to citizenship.

While the media’s focus on the political calculus is understandable, it is disappointing that more attention has not been given to the substantive implications of the different approaches. CNN recently published an interesting article examining immigration reform from the perspective of three different families. A common theme among the three stories was the pain of separation of families resulting from the immigration process. Humanizing the immigration experience is critical for allies of immigration reform, because it fights back against the stereotype held by many of undocumented workers as lazy, non-tax paying, welfare receiving leeches on society. Moreover, humanizing the immigration experience helps bring into stark awareness the logistical impossibilities of deporting 11 million individuals, many of whom have children who were born in the U.S. and so are U.S. citizens. if you begin from the standpoint that this is an impossibility, then the next step is to acknowledge that doing nothing is unacceptable. It is hard to believe that any but the most vocally anti-immigration would feel good about living in a country that prevents certain residents from receiving fundamental social services (e.g., health, education). These are fundamental civil (and indeed human) rights, and as a country, we should work hard to ensure that we can be proud of our policies.