BUSINESS & IMMIGRTIONThe U.S. Business Community Used to Be a Force for Immigration Reform. What Happened?
For decades, the business lobby helped shape immigration legislation and moderated the immigration debate, working alongside advocates for immigrants. In the Trump era, businesses now see more risk than reward in immigration politics. Many have prioritized what’s still doable: tax cuts and deregulation.
Reporting Highlights
· Effective Partners: For decades, the business lobby helped shape immigration legislation and moderated the immigration debate, working alongside advocates for immigrants.
· Trump Effect: In the Trump era, businesses now see more risk than reward in immigration politics. Many have prioritized what’s still doable: tax cuts and deregulation.
· Fewer Deals: Absent business’ muscle, it’s increasingly difficult to reach consensus on reforms, even as companies need more migrant workers.
In 1996, a familiar Republican candidate ran for president calling himself an “America-first” populist, riling up his supporters by claiming that immigrants were “invading” our country.
“I’ll build that security fence, and we’ll close it, and we’ll say, ‘Listen, José, you’re not coming in this time!’” shouted the candidate, Pat Buchanan, to raucous applause at an Iowa rally early that year.
Anti-immigrant sentiment was simmering across the nation, and it was about to translate into federal policy. Leading congressional Republicans, channeling Buchanan’s ideas, were drafting the most restrictionist immigration legislation in nearly a century. The bill included not just a crackdown on undocumented migrants but also provisions that would cut legal immigration almost in half. It looked likely to pass.
But then the business community, so reliant on immigrant workers, showed up.
A motley crew of corporate types, including lobbyists for ascendant Silicon Valley and Seattle tech companies like Microsoft, Intel and Hewlett-Packard, swarmed the nation’s capital, navigating House and Senate hallways as well as the legislative process. Alongside the National Association of Manufacturers and other business groups, they spent months in crowded conference rooms finding common ground with Hispanic and civil rights organizations. They circulated policy briefs to persuadable lawmakers. They counted votes.
They poured resources into the effort, commissioning studies and getting op-eds published defending immigrants.
That spring, their coalition defeated the proposed bill and its attack on legal immigration, forcing Republicans to pursue a scaled-back, though still very tough, illegal immigration enforcement measure.
And Buchanan, after several early victories in the primaries, dropped his bid for the presidency.
This was, for decades, the classic role of the business community in immigration politics. They rarely won total victories, and their motivation, typically, wasn’t much more complicated than economic self-interest.