First of all, really love the article. You always bring really interesting stuff to the forums. Well, the main key is local and national. Immigration is an issue. Issues are sometimes unwinnable. One of the most gifted minds told me that “the immigration issue was never going to be solved but that it could become better with better laws.” Issues take a long time to be solved. They are often too abstract and the average Joe cannot related to the issue, even if it affects the individual directly. National organizations deal with issues. Itssues do not have one good possible solution. Remember campaign reform? It was reform but not solved. Immigration is an issue.

As it happens, local organizations deal with problems. At least, smart local organizations deal with problems. Problems are smaller, concise and can be solved on a short time frame. A small organization of 1-3 members cannot solve immigration reform but can fix the attitude of the local sheriff. They can help open English and Citizenship classes, ect.

It seems that national and local have nothing to do with each other. Wrong. They are dependent of one another. Immigration requires a long term vision. Few people have long term vision. They can work on something for a couple of weeks or months and they’ll give up. It is not because they are dumb or rotten. It is part of the human condition. Say, we can work and make UC Davis change its requirements for their own scholarships and allow Dreamers to apply for them. Problems are usually just band-aids. Still, they give small successes to local heroes. It will make them keep working until the issue is solved. Furthermore, it is easier to mobilized people into the state and national arena once they are accustomed to negotiate with local circles of power.

Which brings me to the next point; Congress people are there to represent the interests of his/her constituents. The state or district predisposition has more power over his/her decision than any big national organization. 1000 nativist in Texas do not have a chance against 50 citizens in California. The true is for each state/district. My congressman is against the Dream Act or any form of adjustment of status. Except AgJobs because if farm workers leave, we might as well deport the whole farm industry back to Mexico with them, the threat is actually for real and more than one farmer that is against CIR has made it clear that it will happen.

So, just make a big round table with all the local, state and national organization in the USA. We can all make a huge plan. Then, we can hold hands and sing kumbayah my Lord…kumbayaaaaa! We can rather all sing “Que sera sera, whatever will be will be.” It is a little harder. You see, each organization from local to national has its own set of beliefs. Some organizations want to open borders and others only to legalized Dreamers. Just remember all those pro-immigrant, pro-Dream groups that were against our last effort. It was legalizing all kids or nothing! One prominent leader told me that the Dream Act should be attached to CIR. Not because Dream needs CIR but because CIR needs Dream! They would rather keep us all in the shadows for “a little longer” and give a bigger chance to less sympathetic immigrants. How many organizations are going to keep working for CIR, if Dream passes first? On the other hand how many organizations are not going to work for Dream if it is attached to CIR? That is a real problem.

Finally, remember those huge manifestations? Many people are here because of them. I am one of them. They were not created to adjust the status of undocumented workers. They were to stop one really bad proposition. I don’t recall the name, or the specifics of it. That is the point. I only know what a lot of people heard. It was going to penalized employers, businesses and congregations and about anyone who had anything to do with undocumented immigrants. Everybody but nativists and restrictionist were against it. It passed the House but it was refuted by the Senate. Some organizations started to fight with one another about which policy would be the best. Everybody assumed that CIR was eminent and some became bolder and more ambitious with their demands. Once a final policy was drafted some of those groups became bitter because it did not fit their dreams and went home or trashed the new bill.

Right now nativist and restrictionist can be summarized on two groups. The first one is people who want to close the borders. Some want some path to legalization but after the laws are fixed and the influx is going to be shut down for sure… which will never happen. If you know a third group, please tell me. In any case, any path to legalization is going to be stop at full force. They do not need to be organized. They do not need to work together. They only need to scream loud and clear by themselves or through local, state or national groups. We, on the other hand, need a consensus not among policy makers but among ourselves. Some of you want open borders and others only the Dream Act. The rest is in between with different degrees of restriction in their likings. WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT OUR OPTIMAL BILL AND OPTIMAL COURSE OF ACTION IS NOT THE OPTIMAL BILL AND COURSE OF ACTION THAT WILL BE TAKEN. Everybody is going to be somewhat satisfied. No one is going to be totally happy.

Still, there is no path but union. Power is in the relationship. We need each other and other organizations to make Dream a reality. In the same token, other groups need us. We are as fundamental to them as they are to us. If it is our way or the Highway, believe it will end up being the highway. It will always be the highway. We can all go to battle and do our own thing against an issue to big, complex and epical for one or five individuals. At the end, it is all about what we all (sympathizers, dreamers, organizations and congregations) are willing or not willing to do to make the Dream Act a reality.