If congressional Democrats could be somewhat creative, perhaps through a merging of climate change issues with immigration, maybe they could get through it relatively unscathed. There has been much research concerning the impact of global environmental changes on population migration - as certain areas get hotter, or more coastal areas get flooded, we should expect a significant shift in population. It's a stretch, but maybe Democrats can somehow link the need for global warming mitigation and a "green economy" to an essential policy on immigration control. Could there be areas within the green industry framework which encourage job development and economic growth within large immigrant-based demographics such as the Latino community? Just saying ...
Otherwise, it's a tough spot for the Democratic Caucus. But, it's manageable. The easy way is to shelve immigration reform till after the mid-terms, bracing for whatever that result may be. But, then you risk offending the Latino political establishment, namely the Hispanic Caucus, state legislators and others. Curious though: we know what Latino elected officials want - but, what exactly do Latino voters want? If jobs and other economic considerations are at the top of their list, then Speaker Pelosi might find a way to ease out of that conversation and put it on hold till 2011. One could argue there is a disconnect between Latino elected officials and the larger Latino populace impacted by immigration. For some reason, the threat of a massive Latino stay-at-home activated by Latino lawmakers doesn't ring that strong.
Republicans pointing out an opportunity to exploit the rift speaks to the current level of miscue in the party. Latino voters are savvy enough to understand where each party stands on immigration; Sen. McCain's (R-AZ) recent support of his state's volatile law pretty delineates that difference, whether he stood for immigration reform or not. Certainly, Republicans are banking on lack of Latino votes for Democrats in November, but they shouldn't expect any for themselves. Going into 2012, the GOP could be a bit smarter about that.
Still, recent activity in Arizona warrants some sort of policy response from the Hill. Perhaps an incremental, somewhat passive yet goal-oriented approach towards clarification of certain laws could be the better way if Pelosi/Hoyer/Clyburn and crew need to focus on this.
Pelosi is a political animal, though, and if she perceives climate change as the path of least resistance, then it's easy to predict she'll go for that. Lawmakers who voted for or negotiated cap-and-trade want to yield some cheddar for their time, as evidenced by Sen. Graham's (R-NC) outrage over the sudden pivot. And, climate change can still be an easier - albeit difficult - sell to constituents back home rather than the emotional powder keg and racial subtext that is immigration. Ultimately, climate change doesn't have a brown face.