Unity08. A people's movement to take our country back.

The political environment has everything to do with developing a centrist platform that has widespread appeal at election time. Unfortunately, following logic in the pursuit of sound policy may not be good politics.

To make my point, I want to construct an example. This example will put some of my observations, about Unity08 discussions about illegal immigration, into a larger political context. We are a nation of laws and it seems to make sense to simply use these laws as a framework for discussion, from which a logical approach to the issues of the day are hammered out. Centrist distaste for breaking the law is reflected by posts that speak to corruption, immigration law enforcement, laws for government reform, and so on. While we like to think that we are proceeding nicely along the path of agreement, in the pursuit of a sound platform, I think we are also risking political losses that will be reflected at the polls. We are losing out on a definite political advantage with our method to devise a platform without first getting a candidate on board that can stump for our message.

Immigration has long been a political hotbed. Laws enacted since 1790 have been exclusionary and quota based (see Link). As recent as 1990 the Immigrant Investor Program sought immigrants that were immediately beneficial to business or skilled paths. Historically, that event is not out of step with previous exclusionary immigration laws. What makes it different is that it gives preferential treatment to a class of immigrants that can be seen as more likely to lean a certain way politically. However, our history of forgiving illegal immigration (see Link for Act of 1986) also shows how immigration policy has leaned to the other side, politically. Unity08 posts seem to logically focus on a policy of law rather than politics. For us to assume that immigration policy should be based on a logical system of law, ignores the politics at the heart of the immigration issue. Centrist positions on immigration are merely afterthoughts to the political agendas already in place.

I think Unity08 is at a distinct disadvantage to the Republicans and Democrats. While centrists have been pursuing the conduct of immigration policy as a matter of law, the two political parties are in the advantageous position to have an immigration policy that promotes their distinct political base. Politically, it is no wonder that Democratic candidates are in no big hurry to disassociate themselves from the reality of a large inlux of poor illegal immigrants. And it also makes sense that Republicans want it stopped (if they are politically prudent they will be cautious in their rhetoric). (Of course President Bush leans to big business more than the more socially conservative Republicans.) When the time for the general election arrives, they both can soften their political positions and focus on the more centrist voters. Unity08 centrists do not have that luxury/advantage.

Now, as we try to hammer out our agenda and platform, is there any way to offset our political disadvantages? Can we get more people on board by conducting centrist political strategies that are more proactive than reactive? I believe that if we are to have a sound political strategy that it must be a part of how we formulate our agenda/platform. Is it a mistake to not get our framework in place prior to developing our positions? As a matter of political necessity, shouldn't we at the least send out feelers and develop some loose ties with centrist candidates now?